Trump federal judge could decide as soon as Feb 10th to yank abortion pill *nationwide*

[NullTuples]

Relatively long article/column, but well worth the read.
https://tennesseelookout.com/2023/01/23/federal-judge-could-decide-as-soon-as-february-to-yank-abortion-pill-nationwide/

[...]

"A Texas judge could decide as soon as next month whether to force the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to pull its two-decade-old approval of the abortion pill, which accounts for more than half of pregnancy terminations in the United States. A nationwide injunction in the case, as requested by anti-abortion groups, would deny abortion medication even in states where abortion is legal and affect millions of individuals’ reproductive rights decisions. The legal fight is viewed as likely to eventually make its way to the Supreme Court, which in 2022 overturned the landmark Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion rights."

[...]

"Kirsten Moore, director of the Expanding Medication Abortion Access Project, said “the idea that a drug approval infrastructure could be up to a single judge or that states would be able to recreate their own drug approval process is rash and downright dangerous.”

Jennifer Dalven, director of the Reproductive Freedom Project at the American Civil Liberties Union, said the case “would be laughed out of court if it were filed somewhere else” due to several procedural defects. But because of the federal district court and the judge, Dalven said, she is taking the case “quite seriously.”

“Mifepristone was approved over 20 years ago. It’s been used safely and effectively by millions of people for early abortion care and to treat miscarriages,” Dalven said. “But unfortunately, in the world we are living in today, we have to take this case seriously.”

[edhopper]

1. How does a Judge have any say

In drug approval. The FDA should ignore the ruling.

[NullTuples]

2. Texas Trump approved judges have been doing nationwide injunctions for a few years now.

Somehow they get to override all the other federal judges who decide differently in their own jurisdictions. Sure, eventually a higher court may decide differently, but for zealots the delay is a win, too.

[leftieNanner]

3. That drug

Has other uses beyond abortion. These creeps are practicing medicine without a license.

[NullTuples]

7. That's what scares me, too - they could go after prescription they "religiously" disagree with.

Last edited Tue Jan 24, 2023, 02:03 PM - Edit history (2)

What's really scary though is that they narrowly target the use of the drug, not just the drug in its entirety. So, it's possible that people who use it for other uses may find that availability increases. Unless the use Republicans want to stop is the primary driver of profit for the product; then the company is likely to repurpose production lines for higher profit products & only occasionally create batches, just enough for the estimated users who still need it. They are taking stable markets and throwing them into chaos.

Turns out all those decades of touting the so-called "Free Market" was, like so much else, just a big lie.

[ZonkerHarris]

4. I'll bet on Big Pharma over this judge long term.

[Irish_Dem]

5. Yep. Now that abortions are illegal, Big Pharma could make a fortune on the pills.

[Samrob]

6. If no one obeys a law, is it still a law? nt