Texas judge suspends abortion pill approval

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
How many of you complaining about this judge's ruling, were happy when Trump's policies had nationwide injunctions placed on them by a liberal judge?

This was not a "Biden" policy that was ruled on. It's an FDA approved drug that has been in use for 23 years. The FDA. How many more drugs will be deemed "unsafe" by a federal judge and taken off the US market?

Yet a single judge was able to place a nationwide injunction. Clarence Thomas in one of his opinions complained about this practice.

Thomas has complained about nationwide injunctions, but there's no real way to do otherwise in a situation like this. A drug is either FDA approved or not. It cannot be unapproved as to the plaintiffs and approved for everyone else. There are a lot of things wrong with this judge's opinion, but the nationwide decision is not one of them.

Congress and/or the judiciary could fix a lot of this. Roberts could get rid of these single judge districts that encourage this judge shopping behavior. There's no reason to let plaintiffs pick a right wing wacko judge they know will rule for them. Congress could also do something. Up until the 1970s, this kind of case would have gone to a three judge panel instead of a single district judge. They could bring that back, or something else like it. They could also require plaintiffs seeking this type of injunction to post large bonds to cover damages in case the injunction is later reversed. Judges usually waive the bond requirement.

[Anonymous]

Fox News is very quiet about this development

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why don't religious nut judges realize that people take this drug for other reasons than abortion?????????

They do realize it, but they don’t want anyone to get their hands on it or else someone somewhere might use it for abortion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why don't religious nut judges realize that people take this drug for other reasons than abortion?????????

They do realize it, but they don’t want anyone to get their hands on it or else someone somewhere might use it for abortion.

Because a fetus is more important than a living breathing person? It's nuts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why don't religious nut judges realize that people take this drug for other reasons than abortion?????????

They do realize it, but they don’t want anyone to get their hands on it or else someone somewhere might use it for abortion.

Because a fetus is more important than a living breathing person? It's nuts.

Actually the abortion pill is used on embryos not fetuses - generally during first ten weeks. So even more nuts.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Every drug company in the world should be filing an amicus brief on this case. If a judge can, with the stroke of a pen, undo the FDA approval of a needed medication, then it puts every business at risk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Every drug company in the world should be filing an amicus brief on this case. If a judge can, with the stroke of a pen, undo the FDA approval of a needed medication, then it puts every business at risk.

You rang?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every drug company in the world should be filing an amicus brief on this case. If a judge can, with the stroke of a pen, undo the FDA approval of a needed medication, then it puts every business at risk.

You rang?

MAGA and far left will love this. They are sticking it to Big Pharma.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every drug company in the world should be filing an amicus brief on this case. If a judge can, with the stroke of a pen, undo the FDA approval of a needed medication, then it puts every business at risk.

You rang?

What will be interesting is to see which pharma companies do NOT file amicus briefs. You’ll be able to figure out pretty quickly which companies already have the GOP in their pocket.

The Republican Party has become a shakedown protection racket.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every drug company in the world should be filing an amicus brief on this case. If a judge can, with the stroke of a pen, undo the FDA approval of a needed medication, then it puts every business at risk.

You rang?

MAGA and far left will love this. They are sticking it to Big Pharma.

What actually would “stick it to big Pharma”: regulating drug prices like every other country on earth, which MAGA definitely does not support.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every drug company in the world should be filing an amicus brief on this case. If a judge can, with the stroke of a pen, undo the FDA approval of a needed medication, then it puts every business at risk.

You rang?

MAGA and far left will love this. They are sticking it to Big Pharma.

In some senses I am the far left and this is bonkers. It’s not “sticking” anything to big pharma, it’s screwing over women, especially rural women. And it runs contrary to everything that’s supposed to be sane and dependable about government. When things come down to how a dirty judge rules, it’s somewhere on the banana republic-authoritarianism scale. It’s gross.

[Anonymous]

I read this is the first time in history that a judge has overruled the FDA on a decision that a drug is safe and effective. And it's on a drug that has an extremely safe track record; if this one isn't safe, then lots and lots of drugs are at risk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I read this is the first time in history that a judge has overruled the FDA on a decision that a drug is safe and effective. And it's on a drug that has an extremely safe track record; if this one isn't safe, then lots and lots of drugs are at risk.

I guess the GOP wants to lose more elections?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I read this is the first time in history that a judge has overruled the FDA on a decision that a drug is safe and effective. And it's on a drug that has an extremely safe track record; if this one isn't safe, then lots and lots of drugs are at risk.

+1 This is great.