I honestly don't think the country can survive on this pathway that we are on. Scotus is corrupt and accountable to no one. Gerrymandering puts state legislatures into radical hands. A fucking convicted felon, adjudicated rapist and fraudster, who sicced a mob on Congress, is allowed to run for POTUS and is a coin flip from winning, people are uneducated about how any of our government works, half of our citizens live in fantasy land, and we basically have free states and slave states when it comes to women's reproductive health. It is NOT SUSTAINABLE.
Any one else kind of annoyed at the NYTimes headline/article suggesting the GOP and the Southern Baptists are split over IVF? I get what they’re trying to say (although leaving the info about the GOP voting against IVF protections to a parenthetical in the article is special), but there are so many subtle ways in which the NYTimes normalizes the GOP and their stance on reproductive rights and holy hell the GOP is not normal on IVF!!! https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/13/us/baptists-gop-different-paths-ivf.html
I've just started a newsletter to list the reasons why a million women a year choose abortion in the USA, and why no legal framework will ever capture all the circumstances that make termination the best option. Ugly realities will be explored. I'd welcome your feedback and participaton!
Hey, they threw the Hippo out of the Supreme Court, but we still have to worry about the Elephant in the Womb.
Naturally I was dreading what the clown car was going to do with this case, but the hope in the bottom of the jar was that the pharmaceutical industry, which is unbelievably rich (and throws around their--that is, our--money to politicians) essentially gets a free pass for anything approved by the FDA. The Supreme Court, which generally has an extremely low opinion of federal agencies (as they said in their NLRB decision, also issued today), has ruled that the FDA is so brilliant and just has so much gosh-darned expertise that once the FDA approves a drug, it is essentially impossible to sue for harm caused by the drug. Because the mighty FDA (even if they couldn't be bothered to review the evidence, or even if every single word and figure the manufacturer submitted was a lie) has approved this drug! So if you have a problem, suck it up. Or at least take a chill pill (which probably costs $1,000 a dose). Pharmacos are always going to favor profits even over the sacred Unborn Lives.
I just watched a fantastic webcast about the case by Lawyers For Good Government (L4GG). Not linking here because they might not want it in general circulation--Jessica, could you ask them if it's OK to link?
"Jessica Ellsworth, an attorney for mifepristone manufacturer Danco, pointed out that the doctors 'do not use this product, do not prescribe this product, and have a conscience right not to treat anyone who has taken this product.'"
I Googled "What is a conscience right" and got results.
Conscience protections apply to health care providers who refuse on religious or moral grounds to perform or assist in the performance of certain health care services.
Federal statutes protect health care provider conscience rights and prohibit recipients of certain federal funds from discriminating against health care providers who refuse to participate in certain services based on moral objections or religious beliefs.
You may file a complaint under the Federal Health Care Provider Conscience Protection Statutes if you believe you:
-- Were required to participate in, or were discriminated against for refusing to participate in, specific medical procedures and related training and research activities; or
-- Were coerced into performing procedures that are against your religious or moral beliefs; or
-- Were discriminated against for refusing to provide health care items or services for the purpose of causing, or assisting in causing, the death of an individual, such as by assisted suicide or euthanasia."
There is some vagueness about how "conscience rights" are defined, but it is something clearly defined for medical professionals. Since so many hospitals are run by religious organizations, especially the Catholic Church, I would guess this is the source of the definition and is, therefore, anything they say it is.
The cynic in me wonders if all the conservative justices, especially Thomas and Alito, ruled against it so it didn’t look bad politically in an election year, gambling that they can rule against using mifepristone after Trump is elected.
Thank you for the overview - helped me to process why I hardly feel hopeful after this ruling, even though I am grateful for this reprieve. Will try to focus on the grateful part for now!
Thanks for the comprehensive explainer (as usual)! This is good news, but ugh, the EMTALA case. So, so worrying. Listening to clips of the arguments in that case was sickening.
Prelogar deserves her own special Self-Restraint Medal for not responding to one of Alito's absurd hypotheticals with "and what if the moon was made of green cheese?"
thank you, jessica and grace. i’m happy that mifepristone will continue to be available for now. but i’m worried about how the right wing will use this decision in messaging during the upcoming election. to wit: “unlax, scotus kept legal the method used in more than half of abortions. now, let’s move on and talk about the border and inflation.”
I'd feel a lot better about how winning an issue reproductive rights will be in November if more Biden surrogates were willing to go for the GOP jugular -- "If the choice is between a woman and a days' old embryo, the GOP are willing to let the woman to die" does not overstate the case. Maybe they are waiting to go hard post Labor Day...
I honestly don't think the country can survive on this pathway that we are on. Scotus is corrupt and accountable to no one. Gerrymandering puts state legislatures into radical hands. A fucking convicted felon, adjudicated rapist and fraudster, who sicced a mob on Congress, is allowed to run for POTUS and is a coin flip from winning, people are uneducated about how any of our government works, half of our citizens live in fantasy land, and we basically have free states and slave states when it comes to women's reproductive health. It is NOT SUSTAINABLE.
Well said!
The pharmaceutical lobby’s are powerful. It’s going to be interesting 🤨
Any one else kind of annoyed at the NYTimes headline/article suggesting the GOP and the Southern Baptists are split over IVF? I get what they’re trying to say (although leaving the info about the GOP voting against IVF protections to a parenthetical in the article is special), but there are so many subtle ways in which the NYTimes normalizes the GOP and their stance on reproductive rights and holy hell the GOP is not normal on IVF!!! https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/13/us/baptists-gop-different-paths-ivf.html
The NYT has become really close to being nothing more than a mouthpiece for the conservatives & an attack rag against Joe Biden.
I've just started a newsletter to list the reasons why a million women a year choose abortion in the USA, and why no legal framework will ever capture all the circumstances that make termination the best option. Ugly realities will be explored. I'd welcome your feedback and participaton!
https://substack.com/profile/89237294-make-privacy-great-again/note/c-59009052
This is great. Fully support.
Hey, they threw the Hippo out of the Supreme Court, but we still have to worry about the Elephant in the Womb.
Naturally I was dreading what the clown car was going to do with this case, but the hope in the bottom of the jar was that the pharmaceutical industry, which is unbelievably rich (and throws around their--that is, our--money to politicians) essentially gets a free pass for anything approved by the FDA. The Supreme Court, which generally has an extremely low opinion of federal agencies (as they said in their NLRB decision, also issued today), has ruled that the FDA is so brilliant and just has so much gosh-darned expertise that once the FDA approves a drug, it is essentially impossible to sue for harm caused by the drug. Because the mighty FDA (even if they couldn't be bothered to review the evidence, or even if every single word and figure the manufacturer submitted was a lie) has approved this drug! So if you have a problem, suck it up. Or at least take a chill pill (which probably costs $1,000 a dose). Pharmacos are always going to favor profits even over the sacred Unborn Lives.
I just watched a fantastic webcast about the case by Lawyers For Good Government (L4GG). Not linking here because they might not want it in general circulation--Jessica, could you ask them if it's OK to link?
An excellent report, many thanks.
Readers might have stumbled across this,
"Jessica Ellsworth, an attorney for mifepristone manufacturer Danco, pointed out that the doctors 'do not use this product, do not prescribe this product, and have a conscience right not to treat anyone who has taken this product.'"
I Googled "What is a conscience right" and got results.
https://www.hhs.gov/conscience/conscience-protections/index.html#conscience-rights
"Your Conscience Rights
Conscience protections apply to health care providers who refuse on religious or moral grounds to perform or assist in the performance of certain health care services.
Federal statutes protect health care provider conscience rights and prohibit recipients of certain federal funds from discriminating against health care providers who refuse to participate in certain services based on moral objections or religious beliefs.
You may file a complaint under the Federal Health Care Provider Conscience Protection Statutes if you believe you:
-- Were required to participate in, or were discriminated against for refusing to participate in, specific medical procedures and related training and research activities; or
-- Were coerced into performing procedures that are against your religious or moral beliefs; or
-- Were discriminated against for refusing to provide health care items or services for the purpose of causing, or assisting in causing, the death of an individual, such as by assisted suicide or euthanasia."
There is some vagueness about how "conscience rights" are defined, but it is something clearly defined for medical professionals. Since so many hospitals are run by religious organizations, especially the Catholic Church, I would guess this is the source of the definition and is, therefore, anything they say it is.
Mixed feelings about the future, but this is a nice 🏆
Today's score:
Christofascist Bullyboys -- 0
Normal People -- 1
I absolutely agree these days and with THIS Court, we need to celebrate whatever victories we can.
The cynic in me wonders if all the conservative justices, especially Thomas and Alito, ruled against it so it didn’t look bad politically in an election year, gambling that they can rule against using mifepristone after Trump is elected.
You could very well be right, this was an easy case for them to boot.
Thank you for the overview - helped me to process why I hardly feel hopeful after this ruling, even though I am grateful for this reprieve. Will try to focus on the grateful part for now!
Thanks for the comprehensive explainer (as usual)! This is good news, but ugh, the EMTALA case. So, so worrying. Listening to clips of the arguments in that case was sickening.
Prelogar deserves her own special Self-Restraint Medal for not responding to one of Alito's absurd hypotheticals with "and what if the moon was made of green cheese?"
Prelogar deserves a medal for being professional and not telling Alito just where he can put his Christofascist philosophy .
100%! I cannot imagine having to take Alito seriously.
thank you, jessica and grace. i’m happy that mifepristone will continue to be available for now. but i’m worried about how the right wing will use this decision in messaging during the upcoming election. to wit: “unlax, scotus kept legal the method used in more than half of abortions. now, let’s move on and talk about the border and inflation.”
I'd feel a lot better about how winning an issue reproductive rights will be in November if more Biden surrogates were willing to go for the GOP jugular -- "If the choice is between a woman and a days' old embryo, the GOP are willing to let the woman to die" does not overstate the case. Maybe they are waiting to go hard post Labor Day...
Yeah, I'm worried they don't know how to find the jugular and what to do with it :(
They never addressed the shitty studies the antis used to back up their non-case that should have gotten the case dismissed in the first place.
Whew! Does this mean that state efforts to restrict mifiprex use will be preempted?
It wouldn't seem to have any bearing on that issue, and states have multiple ways to go after mifepristone.
Yes. LA has already designated it a “controlled substance”, possession of which comes with up to 10 years in jail.