Supreme Court ruling on Abortion Pills

[zantax]

@Orygun

@Adam

@Safiel

One judge should not be able to tank a well considered FDA judgement.

So how do we fix it so all these cases don’t go to this particular judge?

Thats an issue that is frustrating the Supreme Court on both the Left and Right. Massive national issues being decided by a lone wolf federal judge- leading to confusion until its sorted out eventually by the Supreme Court. Its dumb.

As if the entire Roe/Casey framework weren’t the work of the federal judiciary, ok.

[Orygun]

You are confusing apples with oranges. You wouldn’t want it if a lone wolf liberal federal judge passed down a ruling making it illegal nationally to buy an AR. Then you have to wait through appeals and the Supreme Court to strike down that ruling. Thats what I am talking about.

[Impenitent]

several states legalize pot when it is still a federal offence … certain states will give you pills to give you the chance to do something that no trans person will ever be able to do … that is so unfair…

[zantax]

@Orygun

You are confusing apples with oranges. You wouldn’t want it if a lone wolf liberal federal judge passed down a ruling making it illegal nationally to buy an AR. Then you have to wait through appeals and the Supreme Court to strike down that ruling. Thats what I am talking about.

My personal opinion is that it took a constitutional amendment to ban alcohol. But we are far and away from that standard today.

FDA just claimed authority over a bunch of supplements.(natural substances and plant material)

[FreeAndClear]

@H_Arendt

Actually the lesson the left took from Dobbs is as long as abortion is on the ballot, the Democrats chances of winning soar. So you state level R’s scramble — suing in Michigan that keep it off and now trying in Ohio.to require ballot issues must get 60% to pass.

Leftists want everyone to be free to chose their lives. The right wants partisan judges to impose conformity.

From Kansas to Wisconsin the people have spoken. Conservatives want them to shut up and do as they are told.

Tells you something about who would benefit from an early leak of the decision? Possibly

[H_Arendt]

Early leak. It could have been done to force cons to hold the line also.

The “investigation” was a joke since none of the obvious suspects were considered.

The Supreme Court needs to adopt the federal judiciary legal standards — even if it means giving up private jet travel.

[WuWei]

@Safiel

well considered FDA judgement.

[Guilds]

@H_Arendt

The conservative movement has abandoned that in favor of increasingly intrusive. government control. A great example of how power corrupts.

Spot on.
Authoritarianism on full display.

[zantax]

@Guilds

@H_Arendt

The conservative movement has abandoned that in favor of increasingly intrusive. government control. A great example of how power corrupts.

Spot on.
Authoritarianism on full display.

Amazing hubris from the censorship team steveo!

[Guilds]

@zantax

Amazing hubris from the censorship team steveo!

Yeah yeah yeah…that old broken record…is in pieces.

[Safiel]

@WuWei

@Safiel

well considered FDA judgement.

Until now, no Federal Judge has EVER overruled the FDA approval of a drug for any reason.

Perhaps because a Federal Judge’s legal training does not provide them subject matter expertise. The FDA decision makers are both medical doctors and Ph.D.s in the subject of medical and biological science who are eminently qualified to make such decision.

I will take their word on the safety and efficacy of a drug long before I take the word of a person holding only a Juris Doctor (judge or not). Particularly a Judge who has a known agenda on the topic of abortion.

Again, there is a good reason why this is the first time a Judge has overruled an FDA drug approval. And it should be the last time.

[Adam]

@WuWei

@Safiel

well considered FDA judgement.

Stop.

[LucyLou]

@Safiel

@WuWei

@Safiel

well considered FDA judgement.

Until now, no Federal Judge has EVER overruled the FDA approval of a drug for any reason.

Perhaps because a Federal Judge’s legal training does not provide them subject matter expertise. The FDA decision makers are both medical doctors and Ph.D.s in the subject of medical and biological science who are eminently qualified to make such decision.

I will take their word on the safety and efficacy of a drug long before I take the word of a person holding only a Juris Doctor (judge or not). Particularly a Judge who has a known agenda on the topic of abortion.

Again, there is a good reason why this is the first time a Judge has overruled an FDA drug approval. And it should be the last time.

Yes…

[Paul_Thomson]

@H_Arendt

Personally, I favor maximizing citizen freedom. The conservative movement has abandoned that in favor of increasingly intrusive. government control. A great example of how power corrupts

The irony. Replacing one unconstitutional federal edict with 50 state-determined laws is “increasing intrusive government control” ? Explain the logic of that, if you can.

[Auto129]

The federal edict protected 300 million individual choices.

[Paul_Thomson]

@Auto129

The federal edict protected 300 million individual choices.

It also denied the 300 million individual choices of the babies killed. Under state by state legislation, a lot more babies will get their choices taken into account.

[WuWei]

FDA “well considered” - not hardly.

[WuWei]

Your numbers are wrong unless you’re counting the babies

[BlueHeron]

@Paul_Thomson

The irony. Replacing one unconstitutional federal edict with 50 state-determined laws is “increasing intrusive government control” ? Explain the logic of that, if you can.

But the case before the Supreme Court was to eliminate the drug mifepristone for ALL American women. It wasn’t a “states rights” thing. Yes, leave it to the states, put it on the ballot, but that had nothing to do with this case.

[Ben_Natuf]

@BlueHeron

put it on the ballot

not opposed to it, but i’m fairly certain states have legislatures