10 Comments
User's avatar
Rain Robinson's avatar

I think we know what's gping to happen here. The current DOJ leadership is going to concur with banning mifespristone, and soon all firms of abortion, in a national ban, no exceptions for rape or incest. That's what Project 2025 calls for, that's what's going to happen.

Expand full comment
Amy Horowitch's avatar

I’m very worried about this. Trumps DOJ will pursue banning mifepristone nationwide, which will affect millions of women. This drug has been proven safe for decades, but it won’t seem to matter with the current Christian nationalistic environment we are being succumbed to; And we know this SC Court will be no help at all.

Expand full comment
Bill's avatar

Important to remember Danco is also a party to this case. I presume they can take action regardless of the DOJ's positions. First off, I would assume Danco would challenge/appeal Kacsmaryk's ridiculous ruling on standing/mootness to allow the case to go ahead in his court.

Obviously, DOJ's position should be consistent with FDA position which may decide to change the rules on mifepristone distribution on its own. I don't think they need a court to do it for them.

Expand full comment
David J. Sharp's avatar

Of course! A certain culling is necessary … especially in Texas. Women, blacks, Latinos, the poor, Jews, Muslims, Dems, libs, who else? Perhaps Kacsmaryk is pushing for the various camps to be built in his district—why not make some dough while watching them suffer!

Expand full comment
Susan Linehan's avatar

beats me why anyone wants to live in Idaho, or at the very least, why any woman of childbearing age would want to.

Expand full comment
Craig Ramos's avatar

It’s included in Project 2025. No surprise to the educated.

Expand full comment
Joeff's avatar

I’m surprised a hospital named St Luke’s would be lined up against the state unless it’s purely to avoid potential liability. EMTALA provides a civil cause of action for harmed patients.

Expand full comment
Lance Khrome's avatar

Not hearing a lot re: the Comstock Act...that just has to be on the Elno/tRump/Project 2025 agenda, and I suspect it may be "Plan B" if the Supremes don't rule for whomever is currently acting in standing for the plaintiffs on reregulating Mifeprestone...the three states?

Expand full comment
Dana Shilling's avatar

Theyre waiting for more poll numbers before they decide what they think.

The reason I have hope about this case is that pharmacos benefit from immunity when drugs are approved by the FDA. If FDA approval doesn't mean anything or can be removed at any time, then pharmaco liability is back on the table.

BTW since the impetus behind the deportation frenzy is so private prisons can make huge dollars. So, since they are as crooked as they are evil, can we figure out a parity program so they get the huge dollars without imprisoning anybody?

Expand full comment
David J. Sharp's avatar

As to the Roth deal, the DoJT (Department of Justice-ish Trump) is no doubt off to awarding “patriots” and legitimatizing 1/6—just a silly picnic gone astray.

Expand full comment