The High Court’s justices HAVE gotten the message…..
And this should shut down the contraception question for now….
And THIS SHOULD mean votes FOR Biden on the abortion policy going forward…
The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld access to a widely available abortion pill, rejecting a bid from a group of anti-abortion organizations and doctors to unravel the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the pill. In a unanimous decision, written by Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, the court held that the plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge the F.D.A.’s actions.
Those who object to what a law allows others to do can always “seek greater regulatory or legislative restrictions on certain activities,” Justice Kavanaugh wrote. But the decision did not rule out the possibility that other plaintiffs — notably states — may be able to pursue challenges to the availability of mifepristone, a medication used in a majority of abortions in the country.
Here’s what to know:
-
Abortion returns to the court: When the court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, it indicated that it was getting out of the abortion business, leaving the issue to the elected branches. At least for now, Thursday’s decision vindicated the conservative majority’s promise that it would cede the question “to the people and their elected representatives.”
-
The challenge originated in Texas: An umbrella group of anti-abortion medical organizations, along with several doctors, challenged the F.D.A.’s longstanding approval of mifepristone. In the fall of 2022 they filed a lawsuit in Amarillo, Texas, a city in the Panhandle where a single federal judge, Matthew J. Kacsmaryk, hears all new civil cases.
-
The case involved easier access: The challenge before the court centered on changes the F.D.A. put in place in 2016 and 2021, broadening distribution of the pill by easing patients’ ability to receive it through telemedicine and mail. Here’s what to know about mifepristone.
-
The safety of the pill: The groups — citing five studies, including two that were later retracted — questioned the safety of mifepristone, which was approved by the F.D.A. more than two decades ago. Their claim contradicted a large scientific record on the safety of mifepristone and another abortion medication, misoprostol. Read how studies have shown they’re safe……
Andrew Weissmann (weissmann11 on Threads)🌻
@AWeissmann_
A cynical person might think that the conservative Justices (who routinely ignore “standing” doctrine when it suits them) did this to keep the entire issue of reproductive rights out of the election cycle (where vast majority reject what they are doing), so they can take a hatchet to them after November.
I’m a little getting to the story about Martha Ann Alito. God what a fucking witch!
I mean Bitch!
Alito’s Wife Shocked Even the Activist Who Secretly Recorded Her
Lauren Windsor is not apologizing for recording her undercover conversations with Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, his wife Martha-Ann Alito and Chief Justice John Roberts.
In an interview with POLITICO Magazine, the progressive activist and documentarian discussed how and why she posed as a sympathetic anti-abortion activist to secure candid — and pugnacious — comments from Alito and his wife, including on the controversy surrounding the Alitos’ decision to fly politically-coded flags at their properties
She said it was “shocking” to hear Martha-Ann Alito say she fantasized about designing a flag featuring the word “vergogna” — the Italian word for “shame” — to fly in response to LGBTQ+ pride flags. “I definitely did not see that coming,” she said…..
I’m not defending the secret recordings. Just said Martha Ann Alito is a fucking bitch.
Imagine being triggered by a pride flag.
An extremely stupid, dumb story that should embarrass the left.
Alito’s wife is a private citizen. Who cares what her views are? This liberal activist, lied, and pretended to be an extreme right-winger, to record people when they did not know they were being recorded, and then released edited snippets. Her exchanges with the two actual Supreme Court Justices found them saying things to her that were completely appropriate and not at all controversial. They probably just wanted to get away from her because it seemed sort of obvious she was putting on an act.
The left hated it when Project Veritas did things like that. Should we now try to find spouses of politicians and say crazy things to them to catch them in a “gotcha” moment that is supposed to reflect badly on their spouse? This Lauren Windsor should be embarrass by the fiasco.
To be fair, I will point to a similarly dumb story on the right. People are making a big deal out of a video of Joe Biden at a Juneteenth event the past week in which people around him are bopping to the music and he is standing there smiling, while being still and awkward. Somehow, they want us to believe he was “freezing” or having a medical episode.
No, he is just an old, white guy, who can’t dance. What else was he supposed to do? Pretend to jerk off two guys at the same time like Trump does when he dances? It would have been far worse for Biden if he tried to dance. Standing there motionless and smiling was the right thing to do.
And yes
BOTH old timers ARE OLD….
That Andrew Weissman Tweet is also very dumb.
So, in the same week, we have right-wingers upset that Hunter Biden got convicted because they would have preferred to be angry about something and left-wingers upset the Supreme Court ruled 9-0 against something they probably would have wanted to be ruled against, because they prefer to be angry about something.
Vergogna.
The Supreme’s HAD Been consistently ruling AGAINST the state’s up to now…..
This is unusual
Weissman is right to be suspicious
What are you talking about? In this case, they ruled against a state.
They haven’t done that recently
This IS a 180
Uh the “ State”wasnt a party to this case.
The actual ruling is about non-standing against the government regulation ’
Yes I pointed that out awhile ago below.
I thought this case was about something brought by Idaho. Apparently, it is not. Still, I do not understand the claim that the Court has been ruling against states or that this decision is in anyway unexpected, or that everything is somehow a Deep State conspiracy when a result or action of a unit of government goes the way you do not want, or now even if it goes the way you want too.
I would point out that this decision was based on lack of standing.
In other words the Court held that those bringing the suit lacked standing to bring the matter forward because they would be unable to show any harm to them as a result of the objected to activity.
Sorry Jack ……
I brought up ur comment which IS Straight on….
The ruling backs the Government indirectly….
The Biden administration policy on medication abortion STANDS……
Several STATES want to prosecute women using that method of abortion…..
Again…..
There are several cases winding through the court’s that could come up next year for the Supreme’s to consider…
I think one of those involves Idaho and a couple of other states that CG mentioned earlier.
I think the states will get over the Standing hurdle fairly easily.
The Election WILL BE a political factor for the Supreme’s……
Trump win helps Alito and Thomas…..
Biden win means those two may have to moderate their act….
We’ll see….