Texas Judge deciding case that could halt easy access to abortion pill NATIONWIDE

Forum rules
Keep News and Politics about News and Politics.

Do not post full articles from other websites. Always link back to the source

Discuss things respectfully and take into account that each person has a different opinion.

Remember that this is a place for everyone to enjoy. Don’t try and run people off of the site. If you are upset with someone then utilize the foe feature.

Report when things come up.

Personal attacks are against guidelines however attacks need to be directed at a member on the forum for it to be against guidelines. Lying is not against guidelines, it’s hard for us to prove someone even did lie.

Once a topic is locked we consider the issue handled and no longer respond to new reports on the topic.
Deleted User 1990

Unread post

Washington — A federal judge in Texas will hear arguments Wednesday in a closely watched dispute that could halt distribution of a key drug used for medication abortion and disrupt access nationwide, even in states where reproductive rights are protected.

The case before U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk was brought in November by a conservative legal organization on behalf of anti-abortion rights medical associations and targets the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) decades-old approval of the drug mifepristone, one of two medications used to terminate an early pregnancy.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/abortion-pil ... 07655.html
User avatar
Baconqueen13
Princess Royal
Princess Royal
Posts: 6811
Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 12:10 am
Location: In Sanity

Unread post

It is also used after a miscarriage to prevent infections and sepsis by helping the body shed tissue. It is also used to treat hyperglycemia in patients who have Cushing's Syndrome or Type 2 Diabetes. It is used to treat Endometriosis and Uterine Fibroids.

As always with Republican policies they do not CARE about the negative implications their legislature will have on the populous....they only care about pushing their own agenda....They could not force insurance companies, hospitals, and doctors to stop prescribing the medications on a national level so they go after the medication itself and damn the consequences of how it affects anyone else or their health even when it is not related to abortion.

The only way to effectively end abortion is PREVENTION...Aka comprehensive S*x education and universal access to contraceptives......this is not about abortion, it is about control.
jessilin0113
Regent
Regent
Posts: 2308
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2019 1:42 pm

Unread post

Leave it to the GOP to try to ban safe, early, effective abortions, making it so people have to go through more invasive and dangerous procedures later term. The don't even care about the long-term consequences of this.
EarlGrayHot
Regent
Regent
Posts: 3096
Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 10:12 am

Unread post

Whatever a Texas judge rules has no effect on other states or the national Federal level.
Deleted User 1990

Unread post

EarlGrayHot wrote: Wed Mar 15, 2023 11:01 am Whatever a Texas judge rules has no effect on other states or the national Federal level.
Why do you think the article says it would then? To scare people?
User avatar
MonarchMom
Princess Royal
Princess Royal
Posts: 5731
Joined: Sat May 26, 2018 8:52 pm

Unread post

EarlGrayHot wrote: Wed Mar 15, 2023 11:01 am Whatever a Texas judge rules has no effect on other states or the national Federal level.
Unfortunately a single judge on the Federal Court circuit can impede the distribution of a drug already approved by the FDA and widely used for decades.

The plaintiffs know this specific judge's record on reproductive rights is ultra - restrictive, and so brought the case in this location where they could predict the outcome in their favor. It will likely be challenged at the SCOTUS level, but they can decline to hear the case and let it stand.

It is a serious flaw in our system that one person can make sweeping decisions without medical training and against the will of the public.
The legal battle over an abortion pill threatens to upend the Food and Drug Administration’s drug-approval process, a system viewed as the global gold standard and crafted over decades to get crucial medication onto the market quickly and safely.

A federal judge in Texas is being asked in a lawsuit to direct the agency to rescind its approval of mifepristone, one of two drugs used in medication abortions — a move that would be unprecedented.

Legal experts said that such a ruling, if upheld, could lead to a highly politicized regulatory environment, with approvals for controversial treatments facing court challenges and being thrust into the middle of culture wars. Coronavirus vaccines or hormone treatments for transgender people, they said, could be endangered by judges with no scientific background.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2 ... -pill-fda/
Francee89
Regent
Regent
Posts: 4515
Joined: Fri May 25, 2018 7:13 pm

Unread post

It’s wild that we went from Republicans saying “chill out ladies, this just sends it back to the states” to national abortion bans being proposed and cases like this being likely to succeed within less than a year (and by wild, I mean totally and heartbreakingly predictable)
User avatar
SouthernIslander
Queen Mother
Queen Mother
Posts: 9391
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2018 12:48 pm
Location: Texassippi

Unread post

MonarchMom wrote: Wed Mar 15, 2023 11:20 am
EarlGrayHot wrote: Wed Mar 15, 2023 11:01 am Whatever a Texas judge rules has no effect on other states or the national Federal level.
Unfortunately a single judge on the Federal Court circuit can impede the distribution of a drug already approved by the FDA and widely used for decades.

The plaintiffs know this specific judge's record on reproductive rights is ultra - restrictive, and so brought the case in this location where they could predict the outcome in their favor. It will likely be challenged at the SCOTUS level, but they can decline to hear the case and let it stand.

It is a serious flaw in our system that one person can make sweeping decisions without medical training and against the will of the public.
The legal battle over an abortion pill threatens to upend the Food and Drug Administration’s drug-approval process, a system viewed as the global gold standard and crafted over decades to get crucial medication onto the market quickly and safely.

A federal judge in Texas is being asked in a lawsuit to direct the agency to rescind its approval of mifepristone, one of two drugs used in medication abortions — a move that would be unprecedented.

Legal experts said that such a ruling, if upheld, could lead to a highly politicized regulatory environment, with approvals for controversial treatments facing court challenges and being thrust into the middle of culture wars. Coronavirus vaccines or hormone treatments for transgender people, they said, could be endangered by judges with no scientific background.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2 ... -pill-fda/
Thanks for explaining. I was wondering the same thing.
User avatar
Valentina327
Princess
Princess
Posts: 16075
Joined: Mon May 28, 2018 2:23 am

Unread post

Unfortunately, we've set a precident of allowing non medical people to restrict the distribution of certain drugs.

It has been allowed for years now for governors to block the prescription of Ivermectin and HCQ, which were shown to work, off label, to cure "the virus". These were life sparing medications, not anything used with the intention to end a life, and yet this was acceptable to deprive people of being healed.

Pharmacies were threatened with being shut down for filling these prescriptions, so no one would touch them.

The doctors were threatened with loss of their license if they prescribed them.

Same scenario here. Interference in the doctor\patient relationship. There's now a history of it being allowed, which is unfortunate.
Let's Go Brandon!
#FJB

https://openvaers.com/
Francee89
Regent
Regent
Posts: 4515
Joined: Fri May 25, 2018 7:13 pm

Unread post

Valentina327 wrote: Thu Mar 16, 2023 4:00 pm Unfortunately, we've set a precident of allowing non medical people to restrict the distribution of certain drugs.

It has been allowed for years now for governors to block the prescription of Ivermectin and HCQ, which were shown to work, off label, to cure "the virus". These were life sparing medications, not anything used with the intention to end a life, and yet this was acceptable to deprive people of being healed.

Pharmacies were threatened with being shut down for filling these prescriptions, so no one would touch them.

The doctors were threatened with loss of their license if they prescribed them.

Same scenario here. Interference in the doctor\patient relationship. There's now a history of it being allowed, which is unfortunate.
Not at all the same scenario here. The anti-abortion lawyers working to get it banned nationwide admit what they are asking this judge to do is unprecedented:

“When asked by Kacsmaryk about prior cases, the plaintiffs acknowledged there is no precedent of a court removing an FDA-approved drug after many years on the market.

In its argument, U.S. Department of Justice attorneys representing the FDA highlighted the long history of mifepristone as a safe and effective drug, saying 99.9% of people who take it experience no adverse effects. They also argued the FDA has the authority to regulate drugs and evaluate their safety. Granting the injunction, they said, would undermine the agency's authority and the regulatory process.”

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nat ... 469607002/
Locked Previous topicNext topic