For the sake of argument, let's say a US state tries to criminalise a medical procedure that is completely legal in many other states. Has the Supreme Court ruled on the specific limits of that state's jurisdiction?

Unlike sovereign countries, whose legislatures are only bound by their own constitution, US states are bound by the US constitution as well, and I wonder if the Supreme Court believes the US Constitution contains some limit on US states applying their laws (inter)nationally, and arresting any "criminals" the next time they drive through the state.

If so, what are specific rulings about the limits of this jurisdiction? E.g. can a state ban medical providers from other states from providing medical consultations via telephone or the Internet? Can a state ban the act of travelling for the purpose of undergoing a medical procedure in another state, where it is legal?

  • The answer might be related to the Commerce Clause, but a simple reading of the Commerce Clause doesn't really clear things up. Surely it's not the fact that anything that involves any interstate commerce at all cannot be punished by states? Commented Jun 26, 2022 at 14:08
  • While not an exact duplicate, the question and answers at law.stackexchange.com/questions/81453/… are very close and implicate basically the same ideas.
    – ohwilleke
    Commented Jun 27, 2022 at 21:34
  • @ohwilleke Thanks! Seems like we might know for sure soon, republicans in Missouri are trying all possible ways to make extraterritorial jurisdiction over abortions stick in SB 1202, including when the doctor is a resident in Missouri but works out-of-state, if the mother lives in Missouri, or even if "sexual intercourse occurred within this state and the child may have been conceived by that act of intercourse". Commented Jun 30, 2022 at 5:04


You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .