Posted on 06/14/2024 6:57:43 AM PDT by Twotone
The U.S. Supreme Court has now ruled unanimously to keep a controversial abortion drug on the market even after the court ruled two years ago to overturn Roe v. Wade.
In FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, a group of pro-life medical practitioners and their organizations had sued the FDA for relaxing restrictions on mifepristone, the first of two drugs used in a medical abortion. The plaintiffs argued that these relaxed standards would "jeopardize women’s health across the nation."
SCOTUS justices apparently considered the case on technical grounds rather than on the ethical issues regarding killing unborn children and ruled 9-0 that the plaintiffs lacked standing to sue the FDA. Writing on behalf of the majority, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, a Trump appointee who voted to overturn Roe, claimed that "federal courts are the wrong forum for addressing the plaintiffs’ concerns about FDA’s actions."
Kavanaugh did acknowledge that the plaintiffs in this case have "sincere legal, moral, ideological, and policy objections to elective abortion and to FDA’s relaxed regulation of mifepristone." However, such objections do not amount to legal standing, he explained.
"A plaintiff’s desire to make a drug less available for others does not establish standing to sue."
President Joe Biden — who has long supported unfettered access to abortion even though the Catholic Church, of which he is a member, considers abortion a "moral evil" — gave a tepid response to the ruling. "It does not change the fact that the right for a woman to get the treatment she needs is imperiled if not impossible in many states," he said.
"But let’s be clear: attacks on medication abortion are part of Republican elected officials’ extreme and dangerous agenda to ban abortion nationwide."
Several outlets believe that Democrats view abortion as a winning issue this November, and recent referenda in traditionally red states like Kansas, Kentucky, and Ohio indicate that Americans as a whole still support allowing women to kill their unborn children.
We don’t need to hand the Democrats more abortion headlines just prior to the election, but no doubt some IDIOT Republican Senator will do just that.
The people attempting to bring the issue to SCOTUS did not have “standing”.
Where have I heard that excuse before?...
“ Justice Brett Kavanaugh, a Trump appointee who voted to overturn Roe, claimed that “federal courts are the wrong forum for addressing the plaintiffs’ concerns about FDA’s actions.”
——
Then what would be the correct forum?
The lefties have to make an issue of something to keep women voting their way, so they’re going to keep using abortion & claiming it’s about rights. When will Republicans learn a succinct way of saying the vast majority of Americans do not believe in abortion up to birth. A limit is certainly necessary. And they need to start using the stories & pictures of women who are currently doing chemical abortions & winding up with a fully formed fetus in their hands. I mean...how AWFUL!! The lies that Planned Parenthood gets away with are just so bad.
Deuteronomy 19:10-that innocent blood be not shed in thy land, which the Lord God giveth thee... Deut. 27:25 cursed be he that taketh reward to slay an innocent person...
Best to avoid curses no? But foolish Rats plow right ahead into the abyss.
When you want to lose that’s what you do.
The court ruled on "standing" NOT on the pill!
Fine. Don’t yuu think we’ve got an election to win or do you admire the Linda Graham’s out there?
The state legislators, via the ballot box.
I was implying those who promote abortion for political or monetary gains. We all have free will too. Wanting to kill an innocent baby has spiritual consequences that fools ignore to their own peril.
That pill keeps a woman from ovulating.
Congress
SCOTUS is not supposed to be a super-legislature reviewing policy decisions.
I’m not really concerned with what pill they approve, should still be up to the state to decide if it is legal in that state.
This is a standing decision. Doctors don’t have standing to sue based on the general welfare of patients. It is the correct decision. Otherwise, as Kavanaugh said, anyone would have standing to sue over anything. In the long run, this decision is better for conservatives because it will stop kids from suing over “Global Warming” and other libs from suing over whatever they don’t like.
It is the USSC’s place to interpret the Constitution. Ideology can influence that, as it did with Roe and the imagined right to privacy that is not mentioned in the Constitution, but ideology is not supposed to influence that and thus Roe is reversed. The original ruling was an error.
The error is fixed. It is not a declaration about abortion.
This drug was approved by the FDA. Its approval is not about the Constitution. The USSC is indeed not the right place to make the complaint.
The right place is in Congress and the Presidency, who can change FDA policy. If you can’t get consensus there, you lost.
“When you want to lose that’s what you do.”
You might want to check up on how we did after Roe vs. Wade, versus how we were expected to do.
Here’s some headlines you may have missed.
Alabama had ZERO abortions last year.
Abortion in Indiana is down 98% this year.
North Carolina voters just fired two Republicans who pushed abortion.
The Dobbs decision was absolutely correct. Some states are going full abortion, yet others are severely limiting it.
We don’t agree with the SCOTUS decision yesterday, but in my limited legal understanding it is legally correct. We can’t rule on emotions.
As Justice Thomas once said, “Sometimes good policy can be unconstitutional, sometimes bad policy can be Constitutional. That’s why you go to the text.”
It’s time to go back to the drawing board.
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.