Supreme Court Throws Out Bid To Restrict Abortion Medication

[Skylar]

Well crap, those horrible right wing trumper judges always making decisions that only benefit the Republican anti abortionists…..

…oh..wait a sec..that’s not it at all!

Dude, standing is standing. Judge Matt in Texas never should allowed the case to be heard. Not one of the plantiffs had skin in the game.

 

[jknowgood]

This is a lie.

‘Babies’ aren’t being ‘killed.’

And protecting the health and lives of women is in fact healthcare.

There is two people in that decision, guess who doesn't get their point across?

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

Who died and made you the morals police?

.

I'm a moral person, proud of it, and if you can't get over that, oh well.










.

 

[jknowgood]

You don't support healthcare either.

Yes I do, as long as it benefits the mother and child.

 

[lantern2814]

Scratch a "pro-Lifer", find a misogynist.... every time.

This ^^^ from a true misogynist who has called women (his words here) "nothing but whores who want half my stuff".

 

[ThisIsMe]

Dude, standing is standing. Judge Matt in Texas never should allowed the case to be heard. Not one of the plantiffs had skin in the game.

Yeah but this just shows that the scotus doesn’t always rule in favor of the right. From what I’ve seen, they’ve been fairly damaging to some of the cases brought by right wingers.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

You really need then, to be concerned about the explosive growth of Islam in America, which will take you back much further than other religions.
As a leftist, you won't of course have the balls to single it out.

Red herring fallacy, failed attempt to deflect.

The topic is the bad faith, meritless effort of conservatives to deny citizens their right to reproductive autonomy; an effort so devoid of merit that even the Court’s partisan conservative ideologues rejected the claim.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

There is two people in that decision, guess who doesn't get their point across?

No one believes the right’s ridiculous lies.

‘Babies’ aren’t being ‘killed,’ to claim otherwise is a lie.

And access to mifepristone is very much an important part of women’s reproductive healthcare.

 

[Dragonlady]

.

So call the police and report me for being a misoynist.

Who happens to be a female.

Even cops can use a chuckle now and then.


.

Lots of women are misogynists. Political Chic for another.

 

[Skylar]

Yeah but this just shows that the scotus doesn’t always rule in favor of the right. From what I’ve seen, they’ve been fairly damaging to some of the cases brought by right wingers.

The issue was egregious. Judge Matt finding standing for people because they want to limit someone else's access to the drug? Plantiffs who were not harmed in any way by it? Who had never prescribed it nor been required to?

That's ludicrous. That's dangerous. It demonstrates such a profound misunderstanding of what standing is, that is shocking that Judge Matt ever thought that shit would fly. Its a mistake that even a 1st year law student would never, ever make.

But a religiously motivated ideologue would.

Judge Matt from Texas' ruling was stayed almost immediately. And of course it was overturned unanimously.

 

[jknowgood]

No one believes the right’s ridiculous lies.

‘Babies’ aren’t being ‘killed,’ to claim otherwise is a lie.

And access to mifepristone is very much an important part of women’s reproductive healthcare.

Would you approve of your daughter or granddaughter being killed through abortion?

 

[Flopper]

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Thursday rejected a challenge to the abortion pill mifepristone, meaning the commonly used drug can remain widely available.

The court found unanimously that the group of anti-abortion doctors who questioned the Food and Drug Administration’s decisions making it easier to access the pill did not have legal standing to sue.

Supreme Court rejects bid to restrict access to abortion pill

The court found that anti-abortion doctors who questioned the FDA’s easing of access to the pill didn’t have legal standing to sue.

www.nbcnews.com

And that means by mail also. Bad day for the pro birth witch burners.

Not surprised by the decesion but a 9-0 vote sends a pretty clear message to prolife forces that the court won't waste their time on cases in which the plaintiff presents discredited scientific studies and claims lacking any supporting evidence. The court was pissed.

I expect this decision will spur more outrageous restrictions by some red states and more cases such as this introduced in lower courts favorable to prolife. Some red state attorney generals have said they plan to take this same issue back to court. If so, they better have a lot better case next time.

 

[Skylar]

Not surprised by the decesion but a 9-0 vote sends a pretty clear message to prolife forces that the court won't waste their time on cases in which the plaintiff presents discredited scientific studies and claims lacking any supporting evidence. The court was pissed.

Nah. The court didn't judge on the merits of the case. They were careful to avoid any merit based arguments. The standards of standing they reiterated were for ALL cases they would be hearing. Not just this one.

That's why it was 9-0. Because Judge Matt's acceptance of standing of folks who had no skin in the game, who weren't harmed by the drug in question, who had never prescribed it, had never been required to prescribe it.....was absolutely and shamelessly ridiculous. The case never should have been heard.

That's why the court stepped in.

 

[Chillicothe]

I'm late to this thread. And truthfully, didn't read every post.

I did though see an exchange in the first couple of pages that resonated with my poor avatar.

It was these posts:

1. "That means a lot of sluts who are not intelligent enough to know how dangerous that drug can be if used improperly will make themselves sterile. Or dead."

2. "Scratch a "pro-Lifer", find a misogynist.... every time."

3. "That's exactly right, JoeB."

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Like poster JES Horses, I too think Joe B got it deadsolidperfectly right. Misogyny seems to be a defining trait....a 'qualifier'? ...... of the MAGA, Right-to-Life, and Christianist communities. imho.

 

[Delldude]

They'll bounce back with people who have standing sooner or later.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

They'll bounce back with people who have standing sooner or later.

yep, they are just delaying it till after the election.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Thursday rejected a challenge to the abortion pill mifepristone, meaning the commonly used drug can remain widely available.

The court found unanimously that the group of anti-abortion doctors who questioned the Food and Drug Administration’s decisions making it easier to access the pill did not have legal standing to sue.

Supreme Court rejects bid to restrict access to abortion pill

The court found that anti-abortion doctors who questioned the FDA’s easing of access to the pill didn’t have legal standing to sue.

www.nbcnews.com

And that means by mail also. Bad day for the pro birth witch burners.

Butbutbutbut the SC is a right wing gestapo!
You leftists are a joke.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

yep, they are just delaying it till after the election.

Sure they are sweets.

 

[Delldude]

yep, they are just delaying it till after the election.

Wonder where they got that idea from.

 

[ThisIsMe]

The issue was egregious. Judge Matt finding standing for people because they want to limit someone else's access to the drug? Plantiffs who were not harmed in any way by it? Who had never prescribed it nor been required to?

That's ludicrous. That's dangerous. It demonstrates such a profound misunderstanding of what standing is, that is shocking that Judge Matt ever thought that shit would fly. Its a mistake that even a 1st year law student would never, ever make.

But a religiously motivated ideologue would.

Judge Matt from Texas' ruling was stayed almost immediately. And of course it was overturned unanimously.

Why are you talking about judge Matt? I’m talking about the Supreme Court, that’s it. My point was only about the Supreme Court.