Supreme Court STRIKES DOWN a CRAZY Challenge to Abortion Pills
Вставка
- Опубліковано 12 чер 2024
- The Supreme Court ruled this morning that anti-abortion doctors do not have standing to challenge the FDA's approval of mifepristone, an abortion-inducing drug. Harry explains the nuances of the opinion.
-
TALKING FEDS PODCAST is a roundtable discussion that brings together prominent former government officials, journalists, and special guests for a dynamic and in-depth analysis of the most pressing questions in law and politics.
New episodes every week! Listen wherever you get your podcasts.
Apple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/57MG7Rv...
Make sure to SUBSCRIBE!
/ @talkingfeds
FOLLOW US
Website: www.talkingfeds.com/
Twitter: / talkingfedspod
Harry’s Twitter: / harrylitman
Instagram: / talkingfedspod
Facebook: / talkingfeds
TikTok: / talkingfedspod
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER: www.talkingfeds.com/contact
BECOME A PATREON MEMBER: / talkingfeds
CONTACT US
Contact forms: www.talkingfeds.com/contact
Email: talkingfedspodcast@gmail.com
I work in an ER. The “moral injury” argument is absolutely asinine. Almost everything we do causes moral injury. Ever taken care of a drunk driver who killed an entire family? I have. and you have to treat them equally with the standard of care. Ever taken care of someone from a prison who was convicted of sexual abuse of a child? I have. How many suicides do you see a month? I see a few. Everything I do causes moral injury. It’s a part of the job
Thank you
I am moved by your integrity, empathy, skillful compassion and the ability to care for others; especially those who seem to not deserve your care.
Thank you for what you do every day and being an example of kindness and compassion that extends to everyone.
You have a special calling to first do no harm knowing full well that there’s pitfalls along the way, none of it is perfect, humanity is flawed, and you show up to do what you can to make it better.
Thank you.
Thank you @jaceman81
I agree, and thank you for providing a broader perspective! These doctors in the suit seem to care more about themselves than about their patients, which is very frustrating to me. It seems as though they have lost their moral compass and the reason for being there (or never had it to begin with). Hospital staff are there primarily for the patients, not the other way around. A patient being rushed into the ER didn't choose to be there; the staff did, they could choose another job if their morals don't involve helping people in need. They should be careful about being all high and mighty, because they never know if one day the tables have turned and it's they who need help from the people they refuse to help now.
It doesn't end the saga. It just postpones the next challenge until after the election.
The two pills used together save the lives of about 10% of women who are miscarrying.
They wont stop until they force everyone else to think like them.
Nah, they're just softening us up for letting trump off all 3 remaining trials thru immunity 🙄
That’s my exact thought.
Immunity would mostly apply to the Jan. 6 charges. Also, it's pretty obvious they will be kicking that one back to Judge Chutkan, to further delay the case.
Funny I think the same thing but it’s going to be much worse than just that.
They're not softening up anyone, who was already soft.
Sadly, I think you are correct.
Why does the Supreme Court even hear cases without standing? Seems like a huge waste of time at the expense of another case not being heard.
The trial court and the appeals court said that the doctors did have standing. They were going to mess with the FDA's decision-making ability. The organizations behind the plaintiffs will try again. I imagine they'll try to find someone who had a side effect. That would give standing.
@@yesitschelle nah. someone has side effects from every prescription drug made. this drug is way safer than childbirth and has been for 20+ years.
imagine if a group of female doctors tried to ban erectile disfunction meds because they were "morally injured" by the thought of handing out wholly unnecessary vanity drugs that can disable, disfigure, or kill the patient.
Throwing a bone to the masses. Kicked it down the road too ... just ruled the litigants had no standing.😢 Stay tuned.
Let’s enjoy a piece of good news in the vast wasteland of SCOTUS horrors
@@meidassecondsoprano150 Believe me, it's just temporary. It'll come up again and results won't be good.
@@meidassecondsoprano150, I agree with you! I celebrate a return to requiring standing! Too many horrible cases, such as the one striking down the Colorado law giving protection from antigay discrimination, have been recently allowed although the litigants had no standing!
Unless we vote blue, then hopefully the corrupt Supreme Court will become as unimportant as they they think the rest of us are.
The mercenary claim in this is revolting. Those people should find other lines of work where they don't need to help people if all they care about is making money.
Seen and Agreed
It’s great having you and talking feds on the job, Harry❤
Thank you for calling the anti-abortion folks anti-choice.
More than that . The extremists are Pro Death when it comes to young women who make mistakes and get pregnant . It's all about punishment, and they don't give a Ddamn about unborn, or babies, or children, or anyone else .
Thank you for watching!
It's like a doctor saying they won't treat a heart attack patient and one of their parents walks in having a heart attack and they turn them away.... This is ridiculous
I thought any dr could turn away a patient in USA if they don't have medical ins. So no ins they let you die.
Vote Biden 2024 💙💙🇺🇸🇺🇸
Finally! Someone who knows this is a delay. Not a final resolution. Wait for the case where they have standing. Scary😱
It's kind of a race. We need to vote in people who will pass an ethics bill. There's no public information on 'gifts' relating to this topic, but get real.
Person hood is on its way, where an egg is a person and a white sperm is a king.
who besides a pregnant woman who had a complicated medication abortion would have standing though? and still not then either. i don't see who would have legit standing to ban a safe and effective drug that's been used for 20+ years with a great record.
@@nonya.bizness Don't just look for non-frivolous cases because anti-abortion people are looking for absolutely anything. The safest medicine in the world will still have side effects. Placebo pills have side effects.
@@nonya.bizness
I’m hoping we won’t find out who does have standing.
The only financial harm being done is wasting a court's time by filing frivolous petitions to courts based on an ideological reasoning
Weren’t some of the doctors DENTISTS???!!!! Why would a dentist treat a miscarriage?
The Court is just softening us up with this one, lolling us into a false sense of believing things may not be so bad before they release their other decisions.
I’m afraid of that too.
Thank you Harry
Thank you Harry!
Go Harry, you rock!!!
Totally😊
I listened to the entire session of this case at the Supremacists. Josh Hawley's wife was arguing the case for the supposed plaintiffs. The whole thing was ridiculous. So glad the court actually did the right thing for once.
Yes, her.
Abortions are bad, but Woman must be given the choice.
Abortion has saved my life twice, I would have died at 26 leaving my only child without a mom.
@@suzannederusha1370 and your experience is the reason why it needs to be a choice, but we have to accept that it isn't something that we should be taking lightly even if it is our right to have that medical treatment available.
Abortions are neither good nor bad, they are healthcare.
@@SteefPipWho in the he// takes it lightly??
MEN!!!!
@@StarGazerJimExactly. Thank you.
Could the ultra conservative judges be using this decision be for appearance purposes and cool the criticism down? Likely in my opinion. We should not comfortable as this will return as it has big money behind it.
Softening us up for immunity ruling.
Thank you Harry 👀👌
If abortion becomes illegal, because Roe V Wade was overturned, this ruling is superfluous. Like saying you can make beer, but not drink it. I suspect this is more to do with realizing this could set a dangerous precedent regarding medicines and pharmaceuticals.
Excellent❤ Thanks, Harry, great report, as always, Moriah
Thanks, Harry.
Presidential immunity should also be DOA, we shall see.
If no one had standing why did they take the case in the first place.
You need to hear the case to understand plaintiff's argument that they did have standing, before you can reject it
@@benroberts2222 we are talking the highest court in the land not some high school debate class. The standing is outlined in the case. They did it to tell their Christian Nationalist what to do next.
Awesome😎🙌🏼🙌🏼🙌🏼🙌🏼
I’m glad women will still have access to this medication. The problem with the Roe decision was that the Supreme Court relied on a right to privacy in the Constitution that some say is not there. It is now up to the States to pass laws allowing women a right to all modern medical care. If the States won’t pass these laws, the federal government should.
It’s like throwing mud at a wall to see if it sticks , frivolous use of the court.
How are anti-choice folks subject to injury by allowing abortion to be a doctor-patient choice?
... because someone, somewhere, is doing something.
I guess standing is really the “what’s it to you?” Doctrine
It is a standard, orthodox, proper decision on standing, but I celebrate a return to orthodoxy! It is truly refreshing -- which is an indication of how heretical the court has become!
Right? I'm beginning to believe that some of the justices would say the sky is green. I was afraid they would say these bozos had standing.
We’re at this point with this SCOTUS that whenever it rules correctly, it is a SURPRISE.
Also standing means a party can’t cause injuries to him or herself just to be able to file a lawsuit.
Thank you as always Harry. You’re a daily end of the day check in for me to help understand all the noise. Grateful for you.
Thanks Harry!
The SC has to much power with absolutely no accountability. Why?
That is a very, very good question. We need to ask candidates, House and Senate, if they intend to pass ethics reform.
Thank you Harry for shining the truth on this most important update with us all. ⚖️🗽🇺🇲💙
This is a poltical ruling.
Now I am just curious how long it'll take MAGA to call it a Rigged Court🙂
Harry Litman says the case against mifepristone was "DOA and should have been DOA from the time the Court took the case." But if SCOTUS had wanted to outlaw abortion pills, they would have found a way to do so with this case. I think they were afraid to, even Alito and Thomas.
They had to get one thing correct...for now.
As a doctor, you have choices. (I'm an MD. I know how this works.) So, if you have "strong religious beliefs" that prevent you from doing your job, you need to choose a different job. For example, if you object to caring for someone who might have had an abortion, then you shouldn't work where that's possible. If you might have to care for a transgender person or a homosexual person, then you shouldn't work where someone might be a person of that sort.
I loved how Amy Coney Barrett took Thomas to task for how he wrote his comments (as did Justice Sotomayor.)
Thanks Harry
Thanks so much Harry!💖
You have been 1 busy dude lately!💖 💖 💖 ☕️ ☕️ ☕️ ☕️ ☕️ ☕️ ☕️
How much gifts did they charge to mind their own business on this one? Or was this just a fundraiser from the beginning . 😮
⚖️⚖️⚖️⚖️⚖️💖💖⚖️⚖️⚖️⚖️⚖️⚖️⚖️
Wasn't the Colorado Trump presidential primary disqualification case similar? Those voters who brought the case didn't have standing and it had to be left to the Republican voters to decide on their party's candidate preference?
Thanks!
It makes no sense to reject a challenge to a law because those bringing the challenge weren't themselves harmed by the law. All that should be required to establish harm is proof that harm is being produced, irrespective of who is harmed. In this case the Court should have upheld the law because the reasons brought by the challenge fail, not reject the challenge's legality because of lack of 'standing'.
Is there any fallout for the Texas activist judge who ruled on this originally? He basically ignored the laws and went with his own bias, and that needs to be reviewed.
Thanks Harry!😊
The requirement of 'standing' - - that a challenge to a law must be brought by people harmed by the law - - is wrong. For at least two reasons: 1. Those harmed are typically poor, disadvantaged, disempowered, without the resources or support to bring a challenge. 2. Harm is often statistically distributed across a population, such that there are not specific individuals identifiable as having been harmed.
I agree with ruling. My issue is that the wanna be web designer didn't have standing either. I believe that public pressure did get Alito and Thomas to sign onto this. We have to keep it up. Women's Strike 6/24. Vote blue up and down the ballot.
The sparkler before the bomb Harry
I cannot understand that a doctor may legally refuse to participate in an abortion. I know there are a number of countries that has this exception, but to me it's strange. Why work as a doctor or nurse if you can't or won't perform parts of your job? Here in Sweden, we don't have that exception. Either you perform all your duties or you can find another profession.
we had the notion of 'treat everybody' no matter what the issue was, but Americans hate each other so much, there are some people that don't want to work with certain others.
@@oldbeatpete
Then it’s high time they seek different employment!!!
So what was their excuse for overturning Roe v Wade?
Thank you harry for the honest explanation.
I don't understand why anyone who feels that way about female health would work in that field to begin with.
.
👍 HARRY LITMAN 👍
Thanks! Harry Lets all share the Love with Alito's wife in Pride Month!
Thanks for the explanation!
Sovwhen will the rest of the rulings come
Jerry rigs everything, does a video of how a bump stock works. And shows examples of with and without and actual automatic fire as well.
According to his video, it is a practiced use. It doesn't work as well without some personal ability. In other words, it's a tool, user required tool. Unlike factory auto. Where the weapon does all the work. But still, it's an unnecessary civilian item.
P
I'm kinda disappointed. I wanted Dr's to refuse to treat drunk drivers.
I can’t stand this man’s voice and boring delivery. A pity because the subject matter is important.
We need amendments. When is this going to be fixed? Not just a band aid on a gun shot.
Rearranging the letters in: MIFEPRISTONE spells out "FEMINIST ROPE". What are the odds? (please don't shoot the messenger:)
MMM CRAP. DUNG on supreme CORRUPTION ct.