Liberal Forum

SCOTUS knew if they denied access to the pill, Republicans would NEVER win another federal election. They are corrupt, not stupid.

Supreme Court Upholds Access to Abortion Pill in Unanimous Vote | WIRED

The Supreme Court just handed down its most important ruling on reproductive rights since its 2022 overturning of Roe v. Wade, the landmark decision that protected the national right to have an abortion. The court today affirmed the US Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the abortion pill mifepristone. In a 9–0 decision in FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, the justices found that the plaintiffs of a lawsuit that sought to pull the drug off the market lacked standing—that is, they did not have the right to bring the case to court. “The plaintiffs do not prescribe or use mifepristone. And FDA does not require them to do or refrain from doing anything. Rather, the plaintiffs want FDA to make mifepristone more difficult for other doctors to prescribe and for pregnant women to obtain,” Justice Brett Kavanaugh writes in the decision. “A  plaintiff’s desire to make a drug less available for others does not establish standing to sue. Nor do the plaintiffs’ other standing theories suffice. Therefore, the plaintiffs lack standing to challenge FDA’s actions.”
 

Punch » 14 Jun 2024, 10:26 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jun 2024, 10:26 am

SCOTUS knew if they denied access to the pill, Republicans would NEVER win another federal election. They are corrupt, not stupid.

Supreme Court Upholds Access to Abortion Pill in Unanimous Vote | WIRED

The Supreme Court just handed down its most important ruling on reproductive rights since its 2022 overturning of Roe v. Wade, the landmark decision that protected the national right to have an abortion. The court today affirmed the US Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the abortion pill mifepristone. In a 9–0 decision in FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, the justices found that the plaintiffs of a lawsuit that sought to pull the drug off the market lacked standing—that is, they did not have the right to bring the case to court. “The plaintiffs do not prescribe or use mifepristone. And FDA does not require them to do or refrain from doing anything. Rather, the plaintiffs want FDA to make mifepristone more difficult for other doctors to prescribe and for pregnant women to obtain,” Justice Brett Kavanaugh writes in the decision. “A  plaintiff’s desire to make a drug less available for others does not establish standing to sue. Nor do the plaintiffs’ other standing theories suffice. Therefore, the plaintiffs lack standing to challenge FDA’s actions.”

What does that tell you about the zealot they reversed?

Blackvegetable » 15 Jun 2024, 6:44 am » wrote: ↑

15 Jun 2024, 6:44 am

What does that tell you about the zealot they reversed?

They didn't reverse anyone.  They ruled those bringing the case did not have standing.  9-0.

Punch » 14 Jun 2024, 10:26 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jun 2024, 10:26 am

SCOTUS knew if they denied access to the pill, Republicans would NEVER win another federal election. They are corrupt, not stupid.

The Supreme Court just handed down its most important ruling on reproductive rights since its 2022 overturning of Roe v. Wade, the landmark decision that protected the national right to have an abortion. The court today affirmed the US Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the abortion pill mifepristone. In a 9–0 decision in FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, the justices found that the plaintiffs of a lawsuit that sought to pull the drug off the market lacked standing—that is, they did not have the right to bring the case to court. “The plaintiffs do not prescribe or use mifepristone. And FDA does not require them to do or refrain from doing anything. Rather, the plaintiffs want FDA to make mifepristone more difficult for other doctors to prescribe and for pregnant women to obtain,” Justice Brett Kavanaugh writes in the decision. “A  plaintiff’s desire to make a drug less available for others does not establish standing to sue. Nor do the plaintiffs’ other standing theories suffice. Therefore, the plaintiffs lack standing to challenge FDA’s actions.”

If not for easy peasy abortion all these years there might be twice as many chimping and screeching ****** in the USA than the 40MM we have now...!!!
Let's embrace all forms of birth control, queerness and on demand abortion of  all  [[[JEW MEDIA BRAINWASHED LEMMINGS]]] who have proclaimed themselves to be our sworn enemies.... !!!

 

*Huey » 15 Jun 2024, 1:50 pm » wrote: ↑

15 Jun 2024, 1:50 pm

They didn't reverse anyone.  They ruled those bringing the case did not have standing.  9-0.

They must have had standing to get there.

Blackvegetable » 15 Jun 2024, 4:39 pm » wrote: ↑

15 Jun 2024, 4:39 pm

They must have had standing to get there.

Wait for it…..

 In a unanimous decision, the court ruled that the doctors and medical groups challenging the expansion of access to the drug by the Food and Drug Administration in 2016 and 2021 lack a legal right to sue, known as standing. 

https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/06/supr ... 0standing.

When you learn the objective facts let me know.


 

Blackvegetable » 15 Jun 2024, 4:39 pm » wrote: ↑

15 Jun 2024, 4:39 pm

They must have had standing to get there.

Run, coward, run.  

*Huey » 15 Jun 2024, 5:26 pm » wrote: ↑

15 Jun 2024, 5:26 pm

Wait for it…..

 In a unanimous decision, the court ruled that the doctors and medical groups challenging the expansion of access to the drug by the Food and Drug Administration in 2016 and 2021 lack a legal right to sue, known as standing. 

https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/06/supr ... 0standing.

When you learn the objective facts let me know.

The 5th Circuit recognized the standing of the ShamWow clowns who brought the suit.

*Huey » 15 Jun 2024, 5:36 pm » wrote: ↑

15 Jun 2024, 5:36 pm

Run, coward, run.

Tiny, ****.

They had to be afforded standing to be heard in the first place.

Kacsmaryk did so.

He shouldn't have.
 

Blackvegetable » 15 Jun 2024, 5:41 pm » wrote: ↑

15 Jun 2024, 5:41 pm

Tiny, ****.

They had to be afforded standing to be heard in the first place.

Kacsmaryk did so.

He shouldn't have.

Take it up with the 9 Justices.

*Huey » 15 Jun 2024, 5:44 pm » wrote: ↑

15 Jun 2024, 5:44 pm

Take it up with the 9 Justices.

Run, **** moron.

Blackvegetable » 15 Jun 2024, 5:47 pm » wrote: ↑

15 Jun 2024, 5:47 pm

Run, **** moron.

You lose.

You are no longer worth reading this evening.

*Huey » 15 Jun 2024, 5:47 pm » wrote: ↑

15 Jun 2024, 5:47 pm

You lose.

You are no longer worth reading this evening.

Fredo, 

You lied.

Now you run.


 

Blackvegetable » 15 Jun 2024, 5:40 pm » wrote: ↑

15 Jun 2024, 5:40 pm

The 5th Circuit recognized the standing of the ShamWow clowns who brought the suit.

The 'ShamWow Guy' cleans up his act (nbcnews.com)

GHETTOBLASTER » 15 Jun 2024, 3:11 pm » wrote: ↑

15 Jun 2024, 3:11 pm

If not for easy peasy abortion all these years there might be twice as many chimping and screeching ****** in the USA than the 40MM we have now...!!!
Let's embrace all forms of birth control, queerness and on demand abortion of  all  [[[JEW MEDIA BRAINWASHED LEMMINGS]]] who have proclaimed themselves to be our sworn enemies.... !!!

X10.

You'd have 50 times the amount of savage groids running around committing heinous crimes. I get the "morality" aspect of it being wrong, but you have to let your enemy destroy themselves. If blacks and liberals want to abort their offspring by the tens of millions, **** let em'!

Punch » 14 Jun 2024, 10:26 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jun 2024, 10:26 am

SCOTUS knew if they denied access to the pill, Republicans would NEVER win another federal election. They are corrupt, not stupid.

Supreme Court Upholds Access to Abortion Pill in Unanimous Vote | WIRED

The Supreme Court just handed down its most important ruling on reproductive rights since its 2022 overturning of Roe v. Wade, the landmark decision that protected the national right to have an abortion. The court today affirmed the US Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the abortion pill mifepristone. In a 9–0 decision in FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, the justices found that the plaintiffs of a lawsuit that sought to pull the drug off the market lacked standing—that is, they did not have the right to bring the case to court. “The plaintiffs do not prescribe or use mifepristone. And FDA does not require them to do or refrain from doing anything. Rather, the plaintiffs want FDA to make mifepristone more difficult for other doctors to prescribe and for pregnant women to obtain,” Justice Brett Kavanaugh writes in the decision. “A  plaintiff’s desire to make a drug less available for others does not establish standing to sue. Nor do the plaintiffs’ other standing theories suffice. Therefore, the plaintiffs lack standing to challenge FDA’s actions.”
 

What crap and misleading interpretations. 5th party instigation to keep last generation replacement continuing the same arguments of their previous 4 generations.