१५ एप्रिल, २०२३
"Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. issued an order on Friday temporarily ensuring that a common abortion pill would remain widely available..."
"... while the Supreme Court considered whether to grant the Biden administration’s emergency request to preserve the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the drug.
The order was meant to maintain the status quo while the justices studied the briefs and lower court rulings, and it did not forecast how the court would ultimately rule... [Justice Alito] instructed the groups challenging the F.D.A.’s approval of the abortion drug, mifepristone, to file their brief by Tuesday at noon.
The stay itself is set to expire on Wednesday at midnight...."
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
३० टिप्पण्या:
I don't want to hear any crying when a MAN puts one in his pregnant girlfriends drink.
Good move - you can't let a rogue judge decide policy, or you get a judge-shopping instability in the system. Everything any interest group doesn't like gets stopped.
I think the big looser in the recent Roe reversal is Planned Parenthood. If the industry changes to pills there will be no fetus parts to sell, and the Planned Parenthood business model of personal expensive surgical type abortions will be a low volume enterprise.
Hasn't the Court issued opinions speaking very negatively about these Nation-wide injunctions? I think this was going back to the days of a federal judge in Hawaii deciding immigration policy for the entire nation but if I seem to recall the conservatives were against it but Kagan also was against it.
Finally Alito gets it right!!
Vicki from pasadena
Can anyone cite an example of a Leftwing justice doing something similar?
Althouse HERE is former Scalia law clerk Adam Unikowsky, demolishing the Amarillo, Texas District Court decision on Mifepristone. It is a lengthy excerpt on just the standing problem, published at Slate, of a much longer essay published at Adam’s own Substack page. Use the hyperlink at Slate to get there, and see the rest of Adam’s analysis on Timeliness, on Exhaustion of Remedies, and on the Merits for purposes of injunctive relief.
Adam is now an Appellate Practice partner at Jenner & Block’s DC office. MIT undergrad; Harvard Law magna ; clerked not only for Scalia at SCOTUS but also Douglas Ginsburg at the DC Circuit. Specializing in life sciences, IP and of course federal appeals.
Adam’s essay isn’t some whiny emotional screed about women’s self determination. It is an exacting legal deconstruction of how laughably stupid was the Amarillo decision. A massive failure on standing; and if you take the time to go to the rest of Adam’s essay, a monumental failure on practically every other substantive aspect of the decision.
Adam does one other interesting thing in his essay. He REJECTS the personal criticism of Amarillo District Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk. Adam points out that there are plenty of fine judges who are personally pro-life as well as pro-choice. Adam’s incisive, unblinking, unwavering criticism of the decision is purely on legal grounds.
For my own part, as a longtime Federalist Society participant, I well recall my frustration at how federal courts attempted to take over abortion policy in the interests of pro-choice advocates. Can anyone seriously argue that the Amarillo decision, reeking of federal judge-shopping, is the same wretched activity now wrought by the pro-life activists?
Now name an instance when a liberal justice has acted non ideologically.
These pills are like an antivirus software for women. Some women can't live without them.
My McAfee: "We removed 28,369 cookies and trackers. Getting Rid of unwanted files gives you privacy from sites that could use them to track you online"
Blue abortion pills are real world Cookie Monsters.
Wikipedia: "Cookie Monster revealed his real name as "Sid"... He is best known for his voracious appetite and his famous eating catchphrases, such as "Me want cookie!""
Wikipedia: "Superman is Dead (sometimes referred to simply as S.I.D) is a punk rock band hailing from Bali, formed in Kuta. The band has 3 members, namely Bobby Kool (lead vocal, guitar), Eka Rock (bass and backing vocal), Jerinx (drummer)."
The homicide pill is a wicked solution that is neither a good nor exclusive choice. We need to close clinics for profits and parts, and restore the life bias of medical and surgical care. Women, men, and babies deserve an equal opportunity for Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.
There is no mystery in sex and conception. To fuck or not to fuck is the first choice.
That said, for the People and our Posterity, reconciling federalism, pragmatism, idealism, and separation of jurisdictions, is integral to conservative philosophy.
That must be a bitter pill for the NYT to swallow.
Progesterone causes the uterine lining to thicken and continuously increase in its ability to supply nutrition to the unborn child. The abortion pill cuts off progesterone and this weakens the uterine lining, cuts off the child's food supply and prepares the way for the uterine lining to slough off as if in menstruation. The child is sloughed off too. But at the early developmental stage at which you might take this pill, the child looks like a spring twig on tree - a rod with a few buds. On the tree they'll be leaves; on the child, arms and legs. Planned Parenthood like to talk about "clumps of tissue" but you wouldn't go knock the twigs and buds off an apple tree and then say "They're just clumps of vegetable tissue." You'd know there was organized development underway. This understanding is missing in relation to the unborn child and consequently the abortion debate is stultified.
I believe that if we learned the facts of human development by thinking about them first and foremost in relation to our own development we would naturally develop a prolife outlook on a scientific basis. We set out on our own journey when we made that first mitotic cell division which marks conception. And underlying all we have become is that same mitotic cell division repeated but now we added in - top to bottom, side to side, in the third dimension, on a slant so as to develop a human form. At six weeks a form resembling a spring twig with buds was existed. My cells positioned in their proper spot increased in number and then began to specialize. The buds grew and differentiate into flesh and bone. The rod was polarized and at the top it enlarged for the brain while down around below the top light sensitive cells specialized out - I was aware of light for the first time though it was pretty dim and more like a photographic studio for film development than the mountain views I can see now. Below light-sensitive cells, my heart differentiated and began to beat as it has done ever since. I could go on but I hope you see the point I'm making. That's no zygote, no random clump, that is me as I was when I began. And with all my rights. Or do I have any? Are rights just a clump of paper and ink left over from exploded philosophies of the Eighteenth Century? Are we just clumps of demos for the use of an elect claiming authority from clumps of votes found in various spots after elections?
Progesterone causes the uterine lining to thicken and continuously increase in its ability to supply nutrition to the unborn child. The abortion pill cuts off progesterone and this weakens the uterine lining, cuts off the child's food supply and prepares the way for the uterine lining to slough off as if in menstruation. The child is sloughed off too. But at the early developmental stage at which you might take this pill, the child looks like a spring twig on tree - a rod with a few buds. On the tree they'll be leaves; on the child, arms and legs. Planned Parenthood like to talk about "clumps of tissue" but you wouldn't go knock the twigs and buds off an apple tree and then say "They're just clumps of vegetable tissue." You'd know there was organized development underway. This understanding is missing in relation to the unborn child and consequently the abortion debate is stultified.
I believe that if we learned the facts of human development by thinking about them first and foremost in relation to our own development we would naturally develop a prolife outlook on a scientific basis. We set out on our own journey when we made that first mitotic cell division which marks conception. And underlying all we have become is that same mitotic cell division repeated but now we added in - top to bottom, side to side, in the third dimension, on a slant so as to develop a human form. At six weeks a form resembling a spring twig with buds was existed. My cells positioned in their proper spot increased in number and then began to specialize. The buds grew and differentiate into flesh and bone. The rod was polarized and at the top it enlarged for the brain while down around below the top light sensitive cells specialized out - I was aware of light for the first time though it was pretty dim and more like a photographic studio for film development than the mountain views I can see now. Below light-sensitive cells, my heart differentiated and began to beat as it has done ever since. I could go on but I hope you see the point I'm making. That's no zygote, no random clump, that is me as I was when I began. And with all my rights. Or do I have any? Are rights just a clump of paper and ink left over from exploded philosophies of the Eighteenth Century? Are we just clumps of demos for the use of an elect claiming authority from clumps of votes found in various spots after elections?
The entire nation on the edge of its collective seat because democrats couldn't kill babies for a few hours.
I don't know why there aren't more lifetime-appointed conservative judges issuing sweeping injunctions every day like they did with Trump.
Trump bans travel for citizens from heavily covid-affected nations and some moron in Hawaii reverses it before your coffee gets cold.
Liberals know how to play the game...
"Can anyone cite an example of a Leftwing justice doing something similar?"
I'm sure someone will. Just as soon as it happens.
NOW what do you do with all these the Handmaid's Tale outfits they've created?
"Now name an instance when a liberal justice has acted non ideologically"
Non-ideological acts are pretty much Elena Kagan's specialty. She joined Alito's dissent in Ramos v. Louisiana, an opinion some liberals said would have made Robert Bork proud. She explained her motives in a prior decision for the Court. "Respecting stare decisis means sticking to some wrong decisions," she said in Kimble v. Marvel. And don't forget it was Kagan (and Breyer) who joined Roberts to salvage the Affordable Care Act; they agreed to make Medicare expansion voluntary if the Chief upheld the individual mandate. There's also her majority opinion in Kahler v. Kansas, which allowed states to abolish the defense of insanity. This could go on for a long time.
GAHRIE: Check out Sotomayor stay in YU Pride Alliance v Yeshiva U. Sort of thing you had in mind?
@ Josephbleau @ 9:21 am
Planned Parenthood has diversified their services by being heavily involved in transgender movement. I suspect they steer children to doctors for the “treatment” ending in medical sterilization of the children as they “transition” to the opposite gender. Those doctors that do transgender surgeries have a very lucrative practice. I am guessing those doctors also work with PP for the referrals for financial considerations. PP is a big proponent in the public schools providing training materials to teachers, literature for the kids, and consulting for the schools and kids with encouraging the kids to think they are the opposite gender.
PP seems to be all in on the lefts’ agenda of overpopulation causing global warming. Helping sterilize those children by encouraging kids to transition to the opposite gender with drugs and surgery prevents that kid from ever reproducing. Sure, it doesn’t allow for “return customers” that abortions may provide but the end result is the same for their agenda - population control.
@Readering
Sotomayor, joined by Roberts, Kavanaugh, Kagan and Jackson later vacated the stay.
GAHRIE: Check out Sotomayor stay in YU Pride Alliance v Yeshiva U. Sort of thing you had in mind?
Nope. In that case, Sotomayer sided with the LBTQ etc gang against Yeshiva U. The sort of thing I'm asking about would entail Sotomayer ruling against the LBTQ etc gang.
So now, they're going to drag the SCOTUS Into an Abortion "PILL" debate. Incredible.
"Can anyone cite an example of a Leftwing justice doing something similar?"
Conservative Justices constantly "cross the aisle" and give the Liberals narrow 5-4 wins. Because they believe in some principle or aspect of constitutional law.
The liberal justices NEVER do that.
NEVER.
Blogger rcocean said...
"Conservative Justices constantly "cross the aisle" and give the Liberals narrow 5-4 wins. Because they believe in some principle or aspect of constitutional law.
The liberal justices NEVER do that.
NEVER. "
Its so unfair.
I’m confused. Until this latest Alito was the essence of evil. Now he is a hero of the left. Somehow I don’t think it’s because he changed. Maybe it has something to do with him having principles. Just spitballing here. Of course the left doesn’t know what principles mean.
Alito issued a stay. It remains to be seen which side he joins down the line.
Mifipristone abortions are more dangerous for the mother than a D&C, especially if they are done without supervision. Unlike with a D&C,there may be what they call an "incomplete abortion" with retained fetal pparts, which causes hemorrhaging.
What's up with the moderation of this page?
There are two long comments that are purely duplicates. (It's happened to me, of course; I usually try to delete my own duplicate comments on the rare occasions that it occurs. But are duplicates not also an issue of moderation? Did a moderator look at duplicate comments and decide that it's just fine?)
More importantly, I left a comment that was directly responsive to the blog post; it was shorter than the wildswan duplicated comment; it was substantively related to the subject of the post and even included (as Althouse has suggested for readability) a usable hyperlink to the commentary of a former Scalia clerk/Jenner & Block appellate partner on this very subject.
But my comment doesn't even appear here, a day later.
"I’m confused. Until this latest Alito was the essence of evil."
For Progressive, situational ethics is the name of the game. So, let's see what happens when transgendered women demand an opportunity to try out for the US Women's soccer team.
Okay I'll give it a try one more time. My previous comment:
Althouse HERE is former Scalia law clerk Adam Unikowsky, demolishing the Amarillo, Texas District Court decision on Mifepristone. It is a lengthy excerpt on just the standing problem, published at Slate, of a much longer essay published at Adam’s own Substack page. Use the hyperlink at Slate to get there, and see the rest of Adam’s analysis on Timeliness, on Exhaustion of Remedies, and on the Merits for purposes of injunctive relief.
Adam is now an Appellate Practice partner at Jenner & Block’s DC office. MIT undergrad; Harvard Law magna ; clerked not only for Scalia at SCOTUS but also Douglas Ginsburg at the DC Circuit. Specializing in life sciences, IP and of course federal appeals.
Adam’s essay isn’t some whiny emotional screed about women’s self determination. It is an exacting legal deconstruction of how laughably stupid was the Amarillo decision. A massive failure on standing; and if you take the time to go to the rest of Adam’s essay, a monumental failure on practically every other substantive aspect of the decision.
Adam does one other interesting thing in his essay. He REJECTS the personal criticism of Amarillo District Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk. Adam points out that there are plenty of fine judges who are personally pro-life as well as pro-choice. Adam’s incisive, unblinking, unwavering criticism of the decision is purely on legal grounds. It's brutal on the merits, not as a personal attack.
For my own part, as a longtime Federalist Society participant, I well recall my frustration at how federal courts attempted to take over abortion policy in the interests of pro-choice advocates. Now we have the Amarillo decision, reeking of federal judge-shopping, involved in the same wretched activity; trying to run abortion policy through the federal courts as a super-government.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा