Abortion-Keep Legal, Yes or No?

mickeyrat

https://twitter.com/DougWahl1/status/1751997267035165183?t=Nu1bM-iKuLHY5Hq1OVrn6g&s=19

mickeyrat

Halifax2TheMax

Hey, did you hear? Embryos are “children.” Thanks for letting us know, Alabama.

mickeyrat

Halifax2TheMax said:

Hey, did you hear? Embryos are “children.” Thanks for letting us know, Alabama.

taking that top its logical conclusion, jerking off is now illegal, being those are pre-children.....

mrussel1

mickeyrat said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Hey, did you hear? Embryos are “children.” Thanks for letting us know, Alabama.

taking that top its logical conclusion, jerking off is now illegal, being those are pre-children.....

Also, pregnant woman are counted twice in the census.  You an also now drive in the HOV lane.  A pregnant woman may claim a deduction on her taxes.  Lots of new benefits. 

The Juggler

Remember all the people who thought the republicans just wanted to make abortion a state issue and that's that? That things wouldn't go any further? 

This IVF thing is a complete disaster for millions of couples across the country. 

OnWis97

Halifax2TheMax said:

Hey, did you hear? Embryos are “children.” Thanks for letting us know, Alabama.

Imagine a burning building. In Room A are dozens of embryos. In Room B is one infant. Who should you run in save? Gotta go with the numbers, I guess.

The Juggler

The end result of this barbaric nonsense will be less children born...which is the exact opposite of what these maga morons want. 

The Juggler

A 2nd IVF clinic has stopped offering services in Alabama...

mrussel1

The Juggler said:

A 2nd IVF clinic has stopped offering services in Alabama...

Nothing is more pro-life than making it harder to have babies. 

The Juggler

mrussel1 said:

The Juggler said:

A 2nd IVF clinic has stopped offering services in Alabama...

Nothing is more pro-life than making it harder to have babies. 

Around 2% of all babies born each year are through IVF procedures. This needs to be a huge issue this year. 

mickeyrat

https://twitter.com/Josh_Moon/status/1762601698302779740?s=19

mickeyrat

  https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-abortion-mifepristone-telemedicine-4406d53e8af90f6a523264f535f5adf8   Supreme Court seems likely to preserve access to the abortion medication mifepristone

 

Supreme Court seems likely to preserve access to the abortion medication mifepristone

By MARK SHERMAN

1 hour ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Tuesday seemed likely to preserve access to a medication that was used in nearly two-thirds of all abortions in the U.S. last year, in the court’s first abortion case since conservative justices overturned Roe v. Wade two years ago.

In nearly 90 minutes of arguments, a consensus appeared to emerge that the abortion opponents who challenged the FDA's approval of the medication, mifepristone, and subsequent actions to ease access to it, lack the legal right or standing to sue.

Such a decision would leave in place the current rules that allow patients to receive the drug through the mail, without any need for an in-person visit with a doctor, and to take the medication to induce an abortion through 10 weeks of pregnancy. Should the court take the no-standing route, it would avoid the more politically sensitive aspects of the case.

The high court’s return to the abortion thicket is taking place in a political and regulatory landscape that was reshaped by its abortion decision in 2022 that led many Republican-led states to ban or severely restrict abortion.

---

U.S. SUPREME COURT

Supreme Court again confronts the issue of abortion, this time over access to widely used medication

Biden administration sides with promoter, says lawsuit over FIFA policy should go to trial

Supreme Court Justices Barrett and Sotomayor, ideological opposites, unite to promote civility

Biden's big speech showed his uneasy approach to abortion, an issue bound to be key in the campaign

Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, the Biden administration’s top Supreme Court lawyer, said the court should dismiss the case and make clear that anti-abortion doctors and organizations don’t “come within 100 miles” of having standing.

Even three justices who were in the majority to overturn Roe posed skeptical questions about standing to the lawyer for the abortion opponents. Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh are former President Donald Trump’s three Supreme Court appointees.

Barrett, for example, seemed to doubt that the doctors identified by lawyer Erin Hawley could show that were actually harmed by the FDA's actions, one of the requirements for showing standing.

“The difficulty, to me, is that the affidavits do read more like conscience objections,” Barrett said.

Kavanaugh had only one question during the entire session and it too seemed to be focused on the technical issue of standing. He asked Prelogar to confirm that “under federal law, no doctors can be forced against their consciences to perform or assist in an abortion.”

Abortion opponents are asking the justices to ratify a ruling from a conservative federal appeals court that would limit access to mifepristone, one of two drugs used in medication abortions.

That ruling had immediate political consequences, and the outcome in the current case, expected by early summer, could affect races for Congress and the White House.

Another abortion case already is on the docket. Next month, the justices will hear arguments over whether a federal law on emergency treatment at hospitals must include abortions, even in states that have otherwise banned them.

The scene outside the Supreme Court was lively Tuesday morning, with demonstrators occupying the streets surrounding the court and groups on both sides of the issue marching and chanting. The police blocked traffic surrounding the court as well.

The practical consequences of a ruling for abortion opponents would be dramatic, including possibly halting the delivery of mifepristone through the mail and at large pharmacy chains, and ending increasingly popular telehealth visits at which the drug can be prescribed.

President Joe Biden's administration and drug manufacturers warn that such an outcome also could undermine the FDA's drug approval process more widely by inviting judges to second-guess the agency's scientific judgments. The Democratic administration and New York-based Danco Laboratories, which makes mifepristone, say that the drug is among the safest the FDA has ever approved.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, a Biden appointee who joined the court just after the last abortion case, signaled her agreement with some of those arguments when she asked Jessica Ellsworth, Danco's lawyer. whether she has concerns “about judges parsing medical and scientific studies.”

The abortion opponents argue that the FDA's decisions in 2016 and 2021 to relax restrictions on getting the drug were unreasonable and, as Hawley wrote in her clients' main legal brief, “jeopardize women's health across the nation.” She argued Tuesday that she was asking the court to affirm a ruling that “merely restored long-standing and crucial protections under which millions of women used abortion drugs.” Her husband, Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Missouri, and one of their children were in the courtroom to watch her first arguments.

The mifepristone case began five months after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. Abortion opponents initially won a sweeping ruling nearly a year ago from U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, a Trump nominee in Texas, which would have revoked the drug’s approval entirely. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals left intact the FDA’s initial approval of mifepristone. But it would reverse changes regulators made in 2016 and 2021 that eased some conditions for administering the drug.

The Supreme Court put the appeals court’s modified ruling on hold, then agreed to hear the case, though Justices Samuel Alito, the author of the decision overturning Roe, and Clarence Thomas would have allowed some restrictions to take effect while the case proceeded.

In arguments highly focused on technical legal issues, Alito and Thomas asked some of the few questions Tuesday on the substance of the case, including about sending mifepristone through the mail.

They referred to the Comstock Act, a rarely used, 151-year-old criminal law that has been revived by anti-abortion advocates seeking to block the delivery of mifepristone through the U.S. mail. Addressing Ellsworth, Thomas said the law is “fairly broad, and it specifically covers drugs such as yours.”

Even if the court doesn't address the Comstock Act in its ruling, some abortion rights advocates fear that a future administration that favors abortion restrictions could invoke the law to roll back access to mifepristone.

Mifepristone is one of two drugs, along with misoprostol, used in medication abortions. Their numbers have been rising for years. More than 6 million people have used mifepristone since 2000. Mifepristone is taken first to dilate the cervix and block the hormone progesterone, which is needed to sustain a pregnancy. Misoprostol is taken 24 to 48 hours later, causing the uterus to contract and expel pregnancy tissue.

Health care providers have said that if mifepristone is no longer available or is too hard to obtain, they would switch to using only misoprostol, which is somewhat less effective in ending pregnancies.

___

Associated Press writers Amanda Seitz and Lindsay Whitehurst contributed to this report.

___

Follow the AP's coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court at https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court.

mickeyrat

https://twitter.com/ResisterSis20/status/1772802488350933390?s=19

mickeyrat

https://twitter.com/mluckovichajc/status/1777428870632751437?s=19

mickeyrat

https://twitter.com/FPWellman/status/1777915588192432258?s=19

mickeyrat

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/womens-health/permanent-birth-control-increasing-abortion-bans-rcna147264

gimmesometruth27

Arizona House votes to repeal controversial 1864 abortion ban, with help of 3 Republicans

https://www.yahoo.com/news/republicans-join-arizona-democrats-vote-194400753.html


and as you can predict, the 3 republicans that voted to overturn it are going to be primaried.

mickeyrat

I wonder, is this true?

https://www.threads.net/@mplsme/post/C7A6Oo1uouw/?xmt=AQGzzoFv_Vki8DhGFUiXcX3ipz9nMU8H83H45xdbmKxvJA

Halifax2TheMax

That anyone would vote for this bullshit artist, never mind giving him money.

Trump backtracks after suggesting he’s open to states restricting birth control access

The former president said he would “never advocate" imposing limits on contraception, after promising to release a “comprehensive policy” on the issue soon.

Former president Donald Trumpdeclared on Tuesday that he did not support a ban on birth control, despite his responses in a television interview earlier in the day that suggested he was open to states restricting access to contraceptives.

“I HAVE NEVER, AND WILL NEVER ADVOCATE IMPOSING RESTRICTIONS ON BIRTH CONTROL, or other contraceptives,” Trump wrote on his social media platform.

His post was a reversal of comments he made in an interview with KDKA News in Pittsburgh when he was asked whether he supported any restrictions on a person’s right to contraception.

“We’re looking at that, and I’m going to have a policy on that very shortly, and I think it’s something that you’ll find interesting,” Trump said. “I think it’s a smart decision. But we’ll be releasing it very soon.”

Pressed if that meant he would support states if they wanted to ban certain forms of birth control, including the morning-after pill, Trump did not answer directly but said he would be releasing more details “within a week or so.”

“Things really do have a lot to do with the states, and some states are going to have different policy than others,” Trump said.

A Trump campaign official who was asked about the interview pointed out that Trump said in a recent Time magazine interview that he would make an announcement in the near future regarding mifepristone, a prescription medication most commonly used as part of a two-drug regimen for abortions.

According to video of the full KDKA News interview reviewed by The Washington Post, Trump was not asked specifically about mifepristone or other abortion medication, but rather about birth control methods. The interview also touched on Trump’s hush money trial in New York, the steel industry, the economy and mail-in ballots.

President Biden’s reelection campaign, which has already sought to hammer Trump on the issue of reproductive rights, immediately seized on Tuesday’s interview, releasing clips on its social media accounts that highlighted Trump’s openness to allowing restrictions on contraceptives.

“Women across the country are already suffering from Donald Trump’s post-Roe nightmare, and if he wins a second term, it’s clear he wants to go even further by restricting access to birth control and emergency contraceptives,” Biden campaign spokeswoman Sarafina Chitika said in a statement.

Reproductive rights have become a critical election issue in the past two years, one that has tended to benefit Democrats. Since the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade in June 2022, every state ballot measure that has sought to preserve or expand abortion access has been successful, while those that have sought to restrict abortion access have failed — even in states that skew conservative.

Access to contraception in particular is popular among Americans. According to a 2023 Gallup poll, 88 percent of Americans said birth control was morally acceptable, including 86 percent of Republicans, 88 percent of independents and 93 percent of Democrats.

In the KDKA News interview, Trump was also asked whether he would veto legislation if Congress were to pass a federal 15-week abortion ban. Trump did not rule it out but said he did not think there would be any reason for such legislation.

“It’s really not up to Congress,” Trump said. “It’s up to a whole group of people beyond Congress.”

For months, Trump sent muddled signals on the issue of reproductive rights before releasing a video last month in which he said he thought states should decide abortion rights— even as he continued to take credit for appointing the Supreme Court justices who would go on to overturn Roe. The statement was yet another pivot in the former president’s stance on reproductive rights, which has shifted through the decades.

In the interview Tuesday, Trump boasted several times that he was able to overturn Roe, something he said people had told him was not possible.

“We did something that everybody wanted … we got rid of Roe v. Wade, which brought it back to the states,” Trump said, later adding: “It’s brought this issue, and it’s really calmed it down.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/2024/05/21/trump-contraception-restrictions-policy/