Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Will California comply if Supreme Court limits the abortion pill? It’s not clear
KSBW ^ | Apr 18, 2023 | Ashley Zavala

Posted on 04/19/2023 2:25:06 PM PDT by nickcarraway

Gov. Gavin Newsom and several California legislative leaders on Tuesday promised to protect medication abortion in California, but it’s not clear how the state will move if the United States Supreme Court decides to limit the availability of Mifepristone by stripping its FDA approval.

"I believe in the rule of law, the other side doesn’t," Newsom told reporters when asked if he would comply with however the court decides.

Advertisement The governor provided no new information in Tuesday’s news conference on how exactly the state plans to protect access to the pill. He and state lawmakers referenced 17 bills that are being considered this year at the state Capitol to expand abortion access and protections. It wasn’t until after the news conference ended that his staff told reporters Newsom is floating a handful of ideas that were soon to be announced in a news release.

That news release showed proposed action that includes protecting the licenses of pharmacists who dispense the pill in California, regardless of how the court decides on the FDA approval. Newsom’s office said the legislation was not in writing and had not yet identified an author to carry the bill.

When asked if that proposal was contrary to Newsom’s statement during the news conference, Newsom’s Senior Advisor of Communications, Anthony York, said, “No, the federal law will be the federal law.”

"The idea through all of this has been to try to react to the ever more repressive court decisions that come out and tailor policy to the extent possible that would be legal in California, anything we can do to protect access and providers," York said.

The governor will also pursue legislation that would shield out-of-state patients’ private health information from other state laws.

You can now apply for your share of a $725 million Facebook data privacy settlement. Here's how York said the governor will finetune the proposals once the Supreme Court makes its decision. Newsom may provide another update on the state’s response by the end of the week.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: jimknowsdonors

1 posted on 04/19/2023 2:25:06 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

Rumors are that NEWSOM has already used state funds to purchase MILLIONS of abortion pills.


2 posted on 04/19/2023 2:30:14 PM PDT by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

The Supreme Court can compel no force to enforce its opinions.


3 posted on 04/19/2023 2:39:57 PM PDT by Retain Mike ( Sat Cong)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

Are Democrats about to rediscover federalism?


4 posted on 04/19/2023 2:42:59 PM PDT by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Retain Mike

You’re right. USSC has no divisions, as Stalin famously said when told the soviet court would strike down his edicts.

So USCC if issues ruling, ignoring it is believing in “the rule of law” according to Stalin, I mean Newsom.

This Republic operates on good faith execution of legit powers. Without that good faith, it is a dictatorship. Nothing less.


5 posted on 04/19/2023 2:48:14 PM PDT by TonyinLA (I don't have sufficient information to formulate an reasoned opinion said no lefty ever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

Well, they’re already not complying with federal laws on marijuana. What’s one more drug to ignore the feds about?


6 posted on 04/19/2023 2:49:06 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
Will California comply if Supreme Court limits the abortion pill?

Democrat response: "We don't need no stinking laws or courts - unless they agree with us."

Classic clip from 'Treasure of the Sierra Madre': https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqomZQMZQCQ

7 posted on 04/19/2023 2:58:51 PM PDT by JesusIsLord
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

I regard abortion and drugs as a matter up to the individual states. Thus as an ardent supporter of states rights each state should make their own policy on such. We are a Republic made of individual republics.

For the record with rare exceptions, I am anti abortion.


8 posted on 04/19/2023 3:16:52 PM PDT by cpdiii (cane cutter-deckhand-roughneck-oil field trash- drilling fluid tech-geologist-pilot- pharmacist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

The Supreme Court is not going to ban it he abortion pill in California. It might give each state the power to ban it but I don’t see how California could defy such an order. They might boycott other states but so what?


9 posted on 04/19/2023 4:38:23 PM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

When SCOTUS said the issue was no where in the US Constitution and was strictly a State matter they stated a truth. If they reverse that now, they destroy their credibility on not just this, but every thing they decide. They justifiably become the laughing stock.

The inferior judge who made a decision applicable nationwide should be corrected by the SCOTUS. It is a State Issue, not a Federal Issue. States issue birth certificates, death certificates. The only place where it might be a Fed issue is on overseas military bases and embassies.


10 posted on 04/19/2023 6:20:50 PM PDT by spintreebob (ki .h )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spintreebob

You are correct, see my post #8.


11 posted on 04/19/2023 9:04:08 PM PDT by cpdiii (cane cutter-deckhand-roughneck-oil field trash- drilling fluid tech-geologist-pilot- pharmacist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: spintreebob

So basically abortion drugs are a States’ rights issue, but almost every other drug is permitted to be Federally regulated? How does that compute?

Why aren’t drugs treated the same as alcohol and Prohibition?


12 posted on 04/22/2023 9:07:50 PM PDT by Svartalfiar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Svartalfiar

Agreed. Where is the FDA, the EPA, the ATF in the Constitution?


13 posted on 04/23/2023 10:15:28 AM PDT by spintreebob (ki .h )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Retain Mike

That is true. But there are other options. For instance, the House as the body responsible for budgetary and financial matters could tell California that it would not get any federal government funding in its funding authorizations until it complies with the ruling


14 posted on 04/23/2023 10:24:50 AM PDT by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson