politics

19148 readers

2048 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Appeals court embraces abortion-pill limits, sets up Supreme Court review (www.washingtonpost.com)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

8 comments fedilink hide all child comments

A federal appeals court on Wednesday said it would restrict access to a widely used abortion medication after finding that the federal government did not follow the proper process when it loosened regulations in 2016 to make the pill more easily available.

A three-judge panel of the conservative U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit said Food and Drug Administration decisions to allow the drug mifepristone to be taken later in pregnancy, be mailed directly to patients and be prescribed by a medical professional other than a doctor were not lawful.

Despite the court’s ruling against the government and the drug manufacturer, mifepristone will remain available for now under existing regulations while the litigation continues, in accordance with a Supreme Court ruling this spring. Wednesday’s decision is likely to be appealed to the Supreme Court.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

The legal battle over the medication has intensified since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade’s grant of a constitutional right to abortion last June, a decision that spurred multiple states to further limit or ban the procedure.

Kacsmaryk’s mifepristone opinion embraced language used by antiabortion activists, referring to abortion providers as “abortionists” and to fetuses and embryos as “unborn humans.”

The Justice Department, representing the FDA, and the drug manufacturer Danco Laboratories appealed Kacsmaryk’s ruling to the 5th Circuit.

They emphasized the FDA’s reliance on dozens of studies involving thousands of patients to approve the medication, which has been used by more than 5 million women.

Lawyers defending the drug said the antiabortion challengers had no legal right — or standing — to file the lawsuit because they were not directly harmed by the FDA’s approval of the abortion pill.

In an initial review of Kacsmaryk’s opinion, a separate three-judge panel of the 5th Circuit declined to suspend approval of mifepristone but reversed actions taken by the FDA since 2016 to loosen restrictions on how to obtain the medication.

I'm a bot and I'm open source!