No Bull, No Fluff, No Smudges
Your news source for
Flagler, Florida and Beyond

24-Hour Waiting Period for Abortions and Repeal of Undocumented Immigrant Attorney Law Filed

| February 6, 2015

Florida House Rep. John Tobia and Sen. Anitere Flores.

Florida House Rep. John Tobia and Sen. Anitere Flores.

In a sign that hard-core Republican legislators intend to press their case at the Florida Legislature, lawmakers this week filed bills that would impose a 24-hour waiting period for abortions, and that would repeal the law adopted last year that enabled Jose Godinez-Samperio, an undocumented immigrant, to become a practicing lawyer.


Godinez-Samperino is a native of Mexico brought to the United States by his parents when he was 9 years old. The family stayed in the country after its visa expired, rendering them undocumented immigrants. Godinez-Samperio grew up in Florida, attended school, college and law school at Florida State University. He then passed the bar exam but was not admitted to the bar.

The board of bar examiners (not the bar, as was inaccurately noted in a previous version of this story) sought the Florida Supreme Court’s help. Godinez-Samperino was represented by former American Bar Association President Sandy D’Alemberte. The Supreme Court was sympathetic. But it couldn’t act absent a change in law. The court urged the Florida Legislature to make that happen. Improbably, given its generally harsh attitude toward uncodumented immigrants, the Legislature did, specifying that qualifying individuals must have lived in the United States at least 10 years and registered for the military draft.

On May 1, 2014, the House voted 79-37 in favor of backing Godinez-Samperio to practice law. The Senate had voted 25-12 for it. (Travis Hutson, Flagler’s representative and the Republican candidate for a state Senate seat, voted against; then-Sen. John Thrasher voted for it.) Gov. Rick Scott signed it. Godinez-Samperio has since been practicing law in the Tampa Bay area for a non-profit legal services firm.

On Thursday, Rep. John Tobia, the Melbourne Beach Republican who’d opposed the bill last year, filed a bill of his own that would repeal the Godinez-Samperio law. The one-page bill is not proposal so much as erasure: it strikes the 13 lines added to Florida law last year. Tobia was elected to the House in 2008.

It is unlikely that the bill will have more than a symbolic impact in the session starting in early March. But its filing reflects a continuing opposition in segments of Florida to measures inspired by the federal “Dream Act,” the the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals that gives children of undocumented immigrants who have grown up in the United States fair route to education, jobs and citizenship.

Tobia filed the bill Thursday. The same day, Sen. Anitere Flores, the Miami Republican, filed a bill that would add a 24-hour waiting period to a law that already requires women seeking an abortion to receive counseling first.

Flores’s is the latest in a continuing assault across the nation on abortion rights. In legislative sessions last year, the Guttmacher Institute reported, “lawmakers introduced 335 provisions aimed at restricting access to abortion. By the end of the year, 15 states had enacted 26 new abortion restrictions. Including these new provisions, states have adopted 231 new abortion restrictions since the 2010 midterm elections swept abortion opponents into power in state capitals across the country.”

Florida is one of 18 states the Institute ranks as “extremely hostile” to abortion rights, and one of 27 states ranked hostile.

At the same time, legislators in 17 states introduced 95 measures to expand access to abortion, more than in any year since 1990.

Print Friendly

37 Responses for “24-Hour Waiting Period for Abortions and Repeal of Undocumented Immigrant Attorney Law Filed”

  1. Obama 2015 says:

    How many jobs does this create?

    How does this help the state attract people to buy up all the homes for sale all over the state ?

    Why would a company bring their workforce here knowing their female and gay employees are treated as unable to make their own decision so the big strong white man had to do it for them.

    So a student is awarded high school, college degree and passed the bar in our state and they are worried about him being undocumented ? He should have been awarded for following the American dream. This is what our country is all about.

    Yet another reason why you shouldn’t vote Republican.

  2. confidential says:

    Please stewardess pass me a bag!

  3. Sherry Epley says:

    Obama 2015. . . really excellent points! I couldn’t agree more! This is all about ridiculous Republican politics, nothing more!

  4. What's Happening says:

    Unbelievable. We don’t have the wherewithal to fund DCF-so we can help kids that are already born–but we have all the time in the world to put the state between a woman and her doctor and compel her to incubate a pregnancy against her will.

    Seriously, anyone who doesn’t see anything wrong with this picture has something wrong with their ability to see. .

  5. Nikia says:

    I guess I understand that to practice law you must abide by it but seems like it was his parents choices and not his own that caused the situation from this article. Counseling should be part of the abortion decision making process. Too many women suffer from the psychological effects after an abortion but it isn’t popular rhetoric so we can’t talk about that. Why is helping to work through those emotions such a bad thing? Oh wait, because it doesn’t support someone else’s agenda? If you support families in illegal immigration then seems to me you should support families always. Seems like both side of the political isle are only half way there.

  6. Flatsflyer says:

    Why don’t these elected officials simply admit to being driven by American Taliban (Sharia) Laws. There is no difference between the Muslim extremists and the religious right here in the good old USA. What we are strongly enforced laws that prevent any person from attempting to push or foster their religious beliefs on any other person. Believe what you want but keep it to yourself, don’t care if you are a Baptist, Catholic, Jew, Muslim, just keep it to yourself and leave me alone.

  7. Sherry Epley says:

    PLEASE let’s think this through rationally and reasonably. . . Yes, some women may need counseling after an abortion.

    BUT, many more women need counseling and assistance of all kinds, for a much longer period of time. . . after being pressured or even forced to deliver a child they are NOT prepared to raise! Also, what about the counseling needed when they are faced with the horror and guilt of giving it up for adoption!

    This kind of BS legislation is nothing more than politically chipping away at a women’s rights to control her own body and her own life. It’s so hypocritical that those who “say” they want less government (for their guns, etc.) have no problem passing laws that come between women and their doctors, and their rights to reproductive CHOICE!

    • What's Happening says:

      Exactly, Sherry. What I want to know is, if Republicans are against “Big Government”, then why are they putting themselves and their laws between American women and their doctors? Government does not belong in American bedrooms and it damn sure does not belong in a woman’s womb. If that’s their idea of “small government”, they–and their supporters–epitomize rank hypocrisy. ENOUGH. You can’t have it both ways, people–if you despise Obamacare, fine, but if you do, then you cannot possibly support the continued assault on womens’ reproductive health choices. Those choices are protected by the Constitution so you people need to stop this nonsense and mind your own damn business already.

  8. What's Happening says:

    PS. Sharia law? Hell yeah. What an apt comparison. I wish more would make it, because you’re absolutely right, Flashflyer. These “lawmakers” are no better than those Other Religionists they claim to hate so much.

  9. Outsider says:

    It has nothing to do with wanting to get between a woman and a doctor. It has to do with protecting the rights of a child who’s only crime is not being born. Everyone has rights these days; illegals have the right to take Americans’ jobs; women have the right to kill the unborn, which, in 99% of the cases had nothing to do with rape or incest. The issue is not wanting to take away anyone’s choice to do anything, except rob an innocent of the choice to live. Stop flattering yourselves by thinking I give a crap what you do with your own body; it’s the innocent children who will be brutally killed by heinous methods that I care about. I might add that they are killed by.methods similar to the ISIS folks, who enjoy beheading and dismembering their victims.

  10. confidential says:

    GOP Hypocrisy, that is all!

  11. Rick Gardner says:

    So I would assume “Outsider” that you also oppose war in which many fetuses are blown into a red mist by mortar fire, cannon etc… I’m looking forward to hearing your anti war rants. Of course I guess some fetuses are more valuable than others….

    • Outsider says:

      Since most of our current foes barely allow women to breathe without a man’s permission, there aren’t many women combatants other than “sexual jihadists,” an Islamically correct term for personal sex slave. As such, they are not likely to be targeted as soldiers. There are a few women suicide bombers of late, and should any of them have been pregnant at the time of their mission I guess you can be delighted that they got a double whammy choice in one explosion.

  12. Sherry Epley says:

    OK. . . those who absolutely REQUIRE EVERY WOMAN TO GIVE BIRTH TO EVERY FETUS. . . Do you promise to take all those babies into YOUR home and raise them very well for 20 years???? Or, to have your your taxes raised high enough that the government can take excellent care of every single child whose parents (sperm donors, too) are not in a position to care for them????

    And, if you are willing to do those things, why haven’t you become a “free” foster parent or adopted a couple of children, or called the governor demanding that he raise taxes enough to properly fund the DCF so that today’s living children are much better cared for????? Please do reply!

    Please read the article about the tragedy of the little girl that so terribly died because the DCF was stretched too thin from the budget cuts of our conservative administration. In the state of Florida, CARING for a child’s life STOPS when the fetus leaves the womb!

    • Outsider says:

      Because, Sherry, I am too busy raising my own children that I created. Neither one was planned, and I could have found a hundred excuses to justify an abortion: I was basically broke at the time, didn’t have a great job, and hadn’t worked out my future yet. I found, as many others might if they didn’t run away from their own creation, that my children made me a better person. They forced me to start planning for the future. I pursued a better job, which ultimately turned into a very good one. My daughters are growing up into fine young ladies, thank you very much. Every time I look at them I ask myself, “Who in their right minds could have ever considered them a ‘choice’ to be disposed of as an unwanted inconvenience?” And who knows, when these ones are off on their own I just may open my home to a less fortunate child.

  13. JimBob says:

    Sex education and readily available free contraception could alleviate the abortion situation; but a lot of libertarians and religious fundamentalists view that as invading their right to instruct (or more often) not to instruct their children in sexual matters. My own came self-taught listening to radio station WLAC out of Nashville on hot southern summer nights.

  14. Sherry Epley says:

    Exactly right “Outsider”. . . you had a personal CHOICE that has worked out well for you. The government did not take away your CHOICE. Why should your religion or way of thinking be imposed on others to take away their rights and choices? That is the central definition of freedom. How is it that a fetus’ rights are held higher than a living woman, or a man for that matter?

    Until our greater society is prepared to step up and take FULL responsibility for the result of depriving citizens of their personal choices, then those CHOICES should continue to be allowed. . . especially in the circumstance where those choices do NO harm to society in general.

    Just saying over and over, in essence, that “everyone should just be like me and pull themselves up by their boot straps” is completely unfair. There are many, many people who do not have boots. . . much less boot straps. Not everyone has what it takes to be a good parent . . . under any circumstance. You are blessed that you do!

    • Outsider says:

      And that’s where we differ: we did not see ourselves as having a choice to kill a baby; rather, we had a choice on how to react to having a child. Once again, in nearly 99% of cases of abortion, the woman chose to have sex, whether protected or not, where there is ALWAYS the chance of a pregnancy. If there is ever a doubt, I am not opposed to the morning after pill, where there is no child to feel the pain of being stabbed or ripped to pieces.

      • Obama 2015 says:

        If an pregancy is a child before it is born why can’t I get a life, medical and insurance policy with a social security number? Why do I need a birth certificate? If a woman has the means to purchase a policies upon “creation” and can provide she is indeed with child with why can’t she buy a policy to protect it’s life upon a miscarriage or an Abortion? If a person goes to hospice and gets meds to assist in their death, their life insurance policy is still paid. When you can get Met Life to pay that life insurance policy then maybe just maybe it’s a life.
        Until then, you have nothing to stand on but your own beliefs, beliefs I might add are protected for all by the document that gives you the right to bare arms. So remember it works both ways.

        • Outsider says:

          Why was Scott Peterson found guilty of two counts of murder in the deaths of his wife and unborn son? By your logic, it should have only been one count of murder; the other death was just a choice, as, after all it was his child.

          • Obama 2015 says:

            When you’re comparing a murderer to a woman’s choice or a medical necessity you know you’re losing the argument.

            When you murder your wife while she is with your child, that is murder, the wife had no choice and that is what they added the second degree murder charge for the pregnancy . The woman intended to give birth to the child before she was murdered (She was 8 months). If she was not killed the birth was probable. If she was just a few weeks, the charge would not have been filed.

            When a man and women end a pregnancy it’s a choice.

            Why can’t people like you understand that line?

            But again. Why couldn’t Mrs Peterson purchase a life insurance and medical policy for her “child” prior to her death? Why can’t she obtain a SS number ? If it is indeed life, then these companies should provide a policy right? Can you tell me why they they will not write that policy?

            • Outsider says:

              I’m not losing anything; in the eyes of the law, the unborn child was considered a life. If it wasn’t, then he couldn’t be charged with that count of murder. All of this is a moot point, as far as I’m concerned. I don’t need to win an argument to decide for myself that the following are real pictures of real, aborted children: Warning: Grahic. Not recommended for the faint of heart or those who wish to continue to deny reality.

              http://www.priestsforlife.org/resources/abortionimages/archive1.htm

  15. Lin says:

    It’s interesting that most of what republicans say and think is coming from non/republicans
    I don’t think I’m different from a lot of other registered republicans in that I bristle when I hear what our goals and views are
    I do not want to control anyone’s reproductive system
    For goodness sake the birth control pill was approved for contraceptive use in 1960. If you want to find it, it is not expensive and possible to get for free
    If you want to prevent conception, leave me out of it.
    This birth control issue is way-done and only a political talking point

    I am anti-abortion AND pro-choice I won’t stand in anyone’s way, not my business
    Not in favor of waiting period or pre sonograms
    When I read Pierre’s story about this issue a long while back, it was very upsetting that a woman could be put through this procedure

    Women and men both need to exercise their freedoms or they will wilt from disuse
    Whatever happened to accepting responsibility for your own choices in life?

    But don’t ask me to pay ( or hobby lobby) for an extra 4 kinds of birth control because you prefer this to the other 16 they do pay for because that is an affront to my freedom of religion
    It seems like Christian values are the only ones that can be assaulted without fear of reprisal

    Those characterization of republicans are stereotypes that don’t apply to most of us. It’s 2015 — sometimes I think progressives only talk to each other and they are not LISTENING to real republicans. We are not clones of each other.

    • Obama 2015 says:

      “4 kinds of birth control because you prefer this to the other 16 ”

      You mean the 4 Hobby Lobby paid for until Obamacare mandated they pay for it and they made a big deal about it? I guess it is only an attack when freedom of religion is costing a little extra money.

  16. Lin says:

    The court case was to force Bobby lobby to pay for 4 methods they considered to violate their principles
    They already paid for the other 16

    • Obama 2015 says:

      They considered it violated their principles but they paid for them before.

      Like I said before it only violated their principles when Obamacare mandated they pay for it. Before they could take away the option from their employees that may need that coverage without reason.

      Basically if you need these 4 methods and you work at Hobby Lobby you have to pay for it yourself even if you have insurance. So now that woman has to have 2 expenses when if she worked at TJ MAX or Target she would only have one. Seems a little unfair..

  17. Pogo says:

    Seems like Republicans should drop the elephant and use the weasel.

    They tell others to obey God while following Ayn Rand whom – in no particular order – was a childess participant, supporter and/or practitioner of abortion, atheism, and adultery.

    http://www.csmonitor.com/Books/chapter-and-verse/2012/0814/Paul-Ryan-does-an-about-face-on-Ayn-Rand

    Just one example of countless weaselisms.

  18. Sherry Epley says:

    The thing to remember is that no employer pays “directly” for contraceptives of any kind. . . their insurance companies do! AND, that coverage normally does not create higher insurance premiums.

    I think it’s interesting and very telling that Hobby Lobby allowed their insurance company to cover the contraceptive methods in question (the morning after pills) prior to their law suit regarding the requirements of the ACA. So all their posturing is really a political stance. . .

    It’s so easy to boycott companies like Hobby Lobby and Chick Filet. . . they peddle junk. . . not anything anything I would want in my home or in my body anyway.

  19. Lancer says:

    A 24 waiting period is hardly worth griping over. If anything, its a chance to make sure.

    Illegal immigrants are here illegally. Why would anyone advocate an employment advantage of a citizen over an illegal??

    But…the dems love to paint the repubs as the all encompassing boogie man. It would be funny if it wasn’t so pathetic.

    • Obama 2015 says:

      24 waiting period is hardly worth griping over.

      Ok, going forward in Florida, you need to wait 24hrs to purchase any firearm or ammo regardless if it is peer to peer, at a dealer (like wal mart) or at a gun show.

      The seller will then need to do paperwork and have it ready for you to sign before you purchase the firearm the next day. If you don’t complete the sale in 24hrs and prove that you indeed waited 24hrs the firearm becomes the property of the state and you need to go to court to complete the sale.

      hardly worth griping over.. yep.

      • Outsider says:

        The right of the people, to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. Sounds like an infringement to me. That loose quote, by the way, is from the same document the left cites as the source of “separation of church and state,” which, interestingly enough, does not say that.

        • Obama 2015 says:

          A 24hr waiting period isn’t limiting or undermining anything. Just making sure you understand what you are doing and to think through any actions you may do once you obtain the weapons.

Leave a Reply

Read FlaglerLive's Comment Policy | Subscribe to the Comment Feed rss flaglerlive comment feed rss

More stories on FlaglerLive
Loading

ADVERTISEMENTS

suppert flaglerlive flagler live palm coast flagler county news pierre tristam florida
fcir florida center for investigative reporting

Subscribe to FlaglerLive

Get immediate notification of new stories.

Advertisement
Log in
| FlaglerLive, P.O. Box 354263, Palm Coast, FL 32135-4263 | 386/586-0257

FlaglerLive.com