Supreme Court to Temporarily Hold Abortion Pill Ban Until Friday

[beautress]

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court said Friday evening that the abortion pill mifepristone would remain widely available for now, delaying the potential for an abrupt end to a drug that is used in more than half of abortions in the United States.

The order halted two rulings that had sought to curb the availability of the mifepristone as an appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit moves forward: one from a federal judge in Texas who suspended the drug from the market entirely and another from the appeals court that had imposed significant barriers on the pill, including blocking access by mail.

The one-paragraph order, which was unsigned, is the second time in a year that the Supreme Court has considered a major effort to sharply curtail access to abortion. In overturning Roe v. Wade in June, a conservative majority said that it was leaving the issue of abortion to elected officials.

• Two justices, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr., dissented publicly. Justice Thomas gave no reasons. Justice Alito wrote that he was aware that the court had been criticized for issuing orders through the emergency applications docket, what critics call the “shadow docket.”
• Reaction from abortion-rights groups was swift. “The Supreme Court’s decision is a huge relief, but we’re not out of the woods yet,” said Nancy Northup, head of the Center for Reproductive Rights, adding that the Texas ruling blocking access to mifepristone had “sowed chaos, confusion and panic.”
• The order was in one sense no surprise, as members of the Supreme Court’s conservative majority have generally supported the F.D.A.’s authority to make decisions about drug safety.

Abortion Ruling: Supreme Court Ensures, for Now, Broad Access to Abortion Pill (Published 2023)

The order halts a sweeping ruling by a federal judge in Texas as an appeal moves forward in a case that could have profound implications for abortion access and the F.D.A.’s regulatory authority.

www.nytimes.com

Alito and Thomas dissent. Alito talks out of both sides of his face, and the fact Thomas took the time away from his vacation bribes from his right wing billionaire handler, was curious.

Funny that nobody mentioned that abortion was restored to the individual state as the Constitution says. Somehow the past Court, when Roe v. Wade was decided, SCOTUS of 1973 failed to take into consideration that it is the individual state that decides what citizens of their states can and cannot do according to that State's legislature. Back when the ruling was made, and now states control the mundane issues of killing little unborn babies. Women are so empowered now, that they can live in any state they want, and they can leave and dismiss their God-given family if they wish with nobody telling them what to do. Justice may be blind, but I think Lady Justice sheds tears underneath that blindfold. Freedom has a price, a broken heart, isolation of parents and seniors, and dissociated youths who do not acknowledge that their condition is not the fault of others, but their own, by throwing the ten commandments under the bus.

 

[Stann]

So what is unreasonable about leaving it to states to vote on and make laws about them?

Like I said already no entity, government or courts, has the right to impose such restrictions in a free nation. Laws aren't suppose to persecute people who have done nothing wrong and are trying to live their lives as best they can.

 

[Stann]

Funny that nobody mentioned that abortion was restored to the individual state as the Constitution says. Somehow the past Court, when Roe v. Wade was decided, SCOTUS of 1973 failed to take into consideration that it is the individual state that decides what citizens of their states can and cannot do according to that State's legislature. Back when the ruling was made, and now states control the mundane issues of killing little unborn babies. Women are so empowered now, that they can live in any state they want, and they can leave and dismiss their God-given family if they wish with nobody telling them what to do. Justice may be blind, but I think Lady Justice sheds tears underneath that blindfold. Freedom has a price, a broken heart, isolation of parents and seniors, and dissociated youths who do not acknowledge that their condition is not the fault of others, but their own, by throwing the ten commandments under the bus.

You don't even know why Roe vs Wade came into being. Some states, particularly Texas, had such egregious abortion laws women were killing themselves left and right. The federal government stepped in to stop the states from abusing their citizens. Right now, their laws are worse than they were before. Roe needs to come back or abortion laws need to be banned entirely.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

Men should not play God. Modern men speak of abortion like they do the next sporting event or the featured entrée at their local restaurant. Nonchalant -- as if it's just a normal fact of life. Let's just get an abortion and not worry about raising the brat. But let's have some more unfettered sex, so we can get another abortion next month. Ho-hum ... yawn.

It's an upside down world when animals live by higher standards than humans do. When's the last time we heard about a lioness ripping her cubs out of the womb limb by limb?

But mankind has become so pompous, arrogant, and callus that crushing a life "ain't no thang" as long as it isn't THEIR life getting crushed. Little "gods" they have become.

Projecting much? You want to play God, or have a “God-awful” State play God, and force women to carry unwanted pregnancies for nine months and then give birth to totally unwanted children! You want women (and men) totally unprepared for their responsibilities to raise unwanted children! That is almost “Satanic.” It is certainly undemocratic, cruel and not befitting a modern “civilized” society.

You project (maybe even sound a bit jealous?) when you assume that accidental pregnancies all come from “unfettered sex.” Very few women are “ho-hum” about getting “in trouble.” I’ve known many women in that situation, and believe me you are talking through your hat. Have you no daughters, granddaughters, sisters, close female friends?

But it is true women in states with legal abortion no longer need have to fear having their whole lives ruined by having an unwanted child or tying themselves to some miserable pushy “father knows best” type. In reality, becoming pregnant is a fear millions of single and married women regularly live with and worry deeply about — but you wouldn’t know or don’t care about all that. Many women married to men like you probably won’t even speak honestly of these matters. Many even have abortions but refuse to tell their husbands or “boyfriends” about them!

I think you are “pompous, arrogant, and callus” about the sacrifices you expect women to take up. In my eyes you are no better and certainly not much more rational than an “animal” yourself, though I would point out that animals often kill their own young when they sense that is necessary. You are morally base to tell women they must suffer “for their sins” — this is you playing God again.

You talk about an “upside down world,” but your sense of morality is terribly skewed. You have no respect for women who understand that they could easily prevent suffering to all involved (including existing family members or future children) by doing what seems best to them — stopping an unwanted pregnancy as early as possible. Indeed, the handicaps your politicians put in women’s way are brutal and cruel, and prevent women from ending pregnancies as quickly and simply as taking “day after pills” or abortion medication at home or in their doctor’s office.

 

[Stann]

Projecting much? You want to play God, or have a good-awful State play God, and force women to carry unwanted pregnancies for nine months and then give birth to totally unwanted children! You want women (and men) totally unprepared for their responsibilities to raise unwanted children! That is almost “Satanic.” It is certainly undemocratic, cruel and not befitting a modern society.

You project (maybe even sound a bit jealous?) when you assume that accidental pregnancies all come from “unfettered sex.” Very few women are “ho-hum” about getting “in trouble.” I’ve known many women in that situation, and believe me you are talking through your hat. Have you no daughters, granddaughters, sisters, close female friends?

But it is true women in states with legal abortion no longer need have to fear having their whole lives ruined by having an unwanted child or tying themselves to some miserable pushy “father knows best” type. In reality, becoming pregnant is a fear millions of single and married women regularly live with and worry deeply about — but you wouldn’t know or don’t care about all that. Many women married to men like you probably won’t even speak honestly of these matters, or even have abortions but never tell their husbands.

I think you are “pompous, arrogant, and callus” about the sacrifices you expect women to take up. In my eyes you are no better and certainly not much more rational than an “animal” yourself, though I would point out that animals often kill their own young when they sense that is necessary. You are morally base to tell women they must suffer “for their sins” — this is you playing God again.

You talk about an “upside down world,” but your sense of morality is terribly skewed. You have no respect for women who understand that they could easily prevent suffering to all involved (including existing family members or future children) by doing what seems best to them — stopping an unwanted pregnancy as early as possible. Indeed, the handicaps your politicians put in women’s way are brutal and cruel, and prevent women from ending pregnancies as quickly and simply as taking “day after pills” or abortion medication at home or in their doctor’s office.

Special.people, doctors, police officers, medics, firemen make life and death choices every day with real existing people. Abortion has nothing to do with that. A life that doesn't begin never existed in the first place. Name one victim of abortion. Perhaps a woman who wanted a child all along who discovered on her 30 week checkup that the fetus she was carrying had fatal genetic flaws so she was forced to have an abortion, named the fetus and had it buried in a cemetery, bothered to do so. Otherwise you couldn't name one, they never existed.

 

[protectionist]

The same way the Catholic and main Christian denominations oppress women and minorities. I know you're going to say they're more brutal about it. Yes they are but both religions are still guilty of these atrocities.

Now I KNOW you know nothing about Islam. When has Pope Francis told Catholic husbands that they should beat their wives ?....as Islam has told Muslim husbands (Koran 4:34) for 14 centuries.

So how do Catholic and main Christian denominations oppress women and minorities ? I haven't heard of that.

 

[protectionist]

The ideal would be to ban all abortions laws. If that isn't an overstep on women's rights there is no such animal.

To ban all abortion law would be to advocate mass murder.

 

[protectionist]

They have no problem staying out of people's private affairs, at least that would be in the best interest of everyone.

Not the preborn PEOPLE.

 

[protectionist]

It is not a "baby" at that point (in the womb).
It is an organism.

Organism, baby, fetus, preborn,...these are all just names. As the adults whose mothers contemplated abortion decades ago, would tell you, they are PEOPLE.

 

[Skylar]

/thread

This ruling was always a hot pile of dogshit. From standing to violating federal law to statutes of limitations. And that's before we get to the logic of the actual ruling.

It will be torn to shreds. As it should be.

 

[protectionist]

It is neither the role nor responsibility of the state to dictate to private citizens whether they may have a child or not – the state doing so is yet another example of government excess and overreach at the expense of individual liberty.

Individuals know best how to conduct their private lives, not the state.

It isn't a matter of individuals conducting their private lives. It is a matter of the lives of the people becoming born, and it most certainly IS the role and responsibility of the state to speak up for and defend those who are unable to speak for themselves, and unable to defend themselves fom those who would kill them.

 

[Skylar]

There's nothing reasonable about this action, or the court.

Come now. This case never should have been heard. HYPOTHETICAL standing, based on nested conjecture that has never happened once in 20 years for any litigant?

A woman who was harmed would have standing. A doctor who doesn't use the drug nor prescribes it and has NEVER treated a woman who has ever been injured?

The statute of limitations is 6 years. This FDA authorization was 20 years ago. It should never have been heard.

The appeals court are going to shred judge Matt. Just like they did Judge Cannon.

 

[GMCGeneral]

As long as you realize an embryo and a fetus is not a baby or any type of person, that is only one of it's potential outcomes.

Hitler said the same about his undesirables

 

[Stann]

Now I KNOW you know nothing about Islam. When has Pope Francis told Catholic husbands that they should beat their wives ?....as Islam has told Muslim husbands (Koran 4:34) for 14 centuries.

So how do Catholic and main Christian denominations oppress women and minorities ? I haven't heard of that.

Women are suppose to be subservient to their husbands. Up until the early 20th. century men were allowed to beat their wives if they weren't. Many women were beaten to death and the husbands were never charged with murder. That had been the practice in western Christian nations for centuries. Also homosexuals convicted of sodomy were put to death. Today the churches still don't respect women as having sense enough to govern their own bodies, the matrimony rites never changed and gays are not respected, they still consider their orientation either wrong in the eyes of god or a mental disorder or both. But since it occurs across all cultures, all generations and is closed insistent that means it's totally natural and what god intended all along. Perhaps being all- knowing that greatest of all entities in the universes it knew mankind needed homosexuals to balance out the tendency of heterosexuals to overpopulate help save them from doing so before they knew better.

 

[protectionist]

Special.people, doctors, police officers, medics, firemen make life and death choices every day with real existing people. Abortion has nothing to do with that. A life that doesn't begin never existed in the first place. Name one victim of abortion. Perhaps a woman who wanted a child all along who discovered on her 30 week checkup that the fetus she was carrying had fatal genetic flaws so she was forced to have an abortion, named the fetus and had it buried in a cemetery, bothered to do so. Otherwise you couldn't name one, they never existed.

You're saying that people who were aborted never existed ? All One need do is talk to the adults who did NOT get aborted, to know that they exist.

 

[Stann]

Come now. This case never should have been heard. HYPOTHETICAL standing, based on nested conjecture that has never happened once in 20 years for any litigant?

A woman who was harmed would have standing. A doctor who doesn't use the drug nor prescribes it and has NEVER treated a woman who has ever been injured?

The statute of limitations is 6 years. This FDA authorization was 20 years ago. It should never have been heard.

The appeals court are going to shred judge Matt. Just like they did Judge Cannon.

He's done even worse than this and has threatened to do more. He should be disbarred.

 

[Skylar]

He's done even worse than this and has threatened to do more. He should be disbarred.

Radical judical activism, thy name is conservative.

 

[Stann]

You're saying that people who were aborted never existed ? All One need do is talk to the adults who did NOT get aborted, to know that they exist.

I see that's difficult for you to comprehend. Obviously those people were NOT aborted. They don't count. You said it yourself. Do you listen to anyone, even yourself ?

 

[Stann]

Radical judical activism, thy name is conservative.

And they're getting psychotic about it, they actually believe they have the right to do this, especially if it's people they do.not know or care about. Real good Christians, real good human beings - NOT !

 

[Delldude]

It must be convenient to find and use someone else's opinion to support your own opinion.

You must not have seen all the references to litigation in the article.

Aren't you the guy who stopped reading when an article started with MTG?

How objective of you......