Mifepristone ban: the larger context

Roller

Elite Member
Posts
1,443
Reaction score
2,813
I know this has been mentioned elsewhere, but I think it deserves its own thread, given the distinct possibility of dire consequences beyond this one drug.

Following judicial rulings over the past week or so, it seems the issue of a mifepristone ban will come before the Supreme Court. Yesterday, Samuel Alito extended a hold on the lower court's ruling, but that's just a temporary reprieve.

A key problem with this case is that the people who brought it before the Texas Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk cited safety concerns, when in reality they only wanted to eliminate this method of medical abortion. Twenty-three years of experience in the U.S., and more in other countries, has shown mifepristone to be safe when used properly.

If the Supreme Court decides to make the ban permanent based on bogus medical grounds, it will undermine the FDA's ability to carry out its mission. Not only will millions of women be denied a safe way to terminate early (up to 70 days following the last menstrual period) pregnancies, it will open the floodgates for objections to other things the FDA regulates. Anti-vaxx groups will try to do the same for COVID-19 and other vaccines, threatening the lives of all Americans. Remember when Republicans railed against so-called "death panels" in Obamacare, which were non-existent? This would be far worse. Here's hoping the Justices will recognize this and act accordingly.
 

fooferdoggie

Elite Member
Site Donor
Posts
4,494
Reaction score
8,006
Man the trump judge who said he would not bring religion into the courtroom lied big time. one of his arguments is so lame it's like he got the info from trump. crazy How a pathetic judge can screw up the FDA so much.
 

Roller

Elite Member
Posts
1,443
Reaction score
2,813
Man the trump judge who said he would not bring religion into the courtroom lied big time. one of his arguments is so lame it's like he got the info from trump. crazy How a pathetic judge can screw up the FDA so much.
Neither this judge nor anyone else in favor of the ban will ever admit on record that their decisions were based on religious or other personal beliefs. Medical safety is just a pretext.

If the ban is upheld and anti-vaxxers try the same, it’ll be a bit different. They’ll claim vaccines aren’t safe, something they truly believe. But the safety and efficacy of vaccines and medications should remain under the purview of the FDA and medical experts, not the courts.
 

fooferdoggie

Elite Member
Site Donor
Posts
4,494
Reaction score
8,006
Neither this judge nor anyone else in favor of the ban will ever admit on record that their decisions were based on religious or other personal beliefs. Medical safety is just a pretext.

If the ban is upheld and anti-vaxxers try the same, it’ll be a bit different. They’ll claim vaccines aren’t safe, something they truly believe. But the safety and efficacy of vaccines and medications should remain under the purview of the FDA and medical experts, not the courts.
yep it will be the gift trump keeps on giving.
 

Roller

Elite Member
Posts
1,443
Reaction score
2,813
SCOTUS, specifically Justice Alito, has set a tomorrow as a new deadline. It worries me that they didn't immediately see Kacsmaryk's ruling as monumental overreach with dire consequences if upheld, but we'll see.
 

Alli

Perfection
Staff Member
Site Donor
Posts
5,928
Reaction score
11,857
Location
Alabackwards
SCOTUS, specifically Justice Alito, has set a tomorrow as a new deadline. It worries me that they didn't immediately see Kacsmaryk's ruling as monumental overreach with dire consequences if upheld, but we'll see.
I figure when they do that it’s to make us believe they’re actually discussing it and thinking about it. Hah.
 
Top Bottom
1 2