Supreme Court unanimously strikes down legal challenge to abortion pill mifepristone
Vložit
- čas přidán 12. 06. 2024
- The Supreme Court has ruled that a group of doctors lacked legal standing to challenge the FDA's regulation of the abortion pill mifepristone, keeping status quo on the medication. This will maintain the availability of the abortion pill, mifepristone.
The unanimous opinion was authored by Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
Read more: abcnews.go.com/Politics/supre...
---
Subscribe to ABC News on CZcams: abcnews.visitlink.me/59aJ1G
Watch 24/7 coverage of breaking news and live events on ABC News Live: • LIVE: Latest News Head...
Watch full episodes of World News Tonight with David Muir here: • ABC World News Tonight...
Read ABC News reports online: abcnews.go.com
ABC News Digital is your daily source of breaking national and world news, exclusive interviews and 24/7 live streaming coverage. ABC News is the home to the #1 evening newscast “World News Tonight” with David Muir, “Good Morning America,” “20/20,” “Nightline,” “This Week” with George Stephanopoulos, “ABC News Live Prime” with Linsey Davis, plus the daily news podcast “Start Here.”
Connect with ABC News on social media:
Facebook: / abcnews
Instagram: / abcnews
TikTok: / abcnews
X: / abc
Threads: www.threads.net/@abcnews
LinkedIn: / abcnews
#supremecourt #health $#law #news #abcnews
Oh, sweet sanity! 😅 At least there is still a TINY bit of sense left at SCOTUS.
They want people to forget how they gutted Roe v. Wade
A glimmer of hope that we may still have our rights respected!
We can all hope... I see the Handmaid's Tale in our future if they have their way.
@@aarone9000We won’t for long, once Trump is reelected we’re about to live in a dystopian country.
@@fernandococom5970 nah that's not going to be forgotten for century's no matter what side your on
Yup, they had no standing, just like a number of these insane conservative litigants in recent cases that this court has entertained….go to hell with all this conservative court activism! Learn to leave people TF alone. Respect that even other people of faith don’t see it like you. Learn to love others, even those who you believe commit sin. And stop trying to use the powers and levers of the state to try to rule over the rest of us by religious fiat. A conservative court is now telling you “go no further”. Sadly, some of you will insist upon doing so.
Good thing 19th century Christian Northerners didn’t see it that way when it came to deciding the fate of the Southerners.
@@johnnyboy6707 but let’s flip that because we now have enough evidence to know exactly what southerners would’ve done to the northerners and the slaves had they won the war. Part of our national amnesia is that we tell the story of the Civil War as if the southerners were victims, they were not. This false sense of victimhood permeates all throughout southern a.k.a. conservative ideology today. No one is attacking them, yet they insist upon attacking others using the powers of minority rule, and the courts.
I Agree with you. They need to stop trying to control people. This is America they need to look at what it stands for. We are not China or North Korean.. or any other country.
I wonder if its because 70% of Americans would have lost it and they don't want that court to expand.
Trust, they don't care one bit
This finding is extremely significant for those who are paying attention. It proves that the court is not loyal to its religious values. It actually places the demands of the pharmaceutical industry first.
What makes this important to understand is that means the religious values are a tool of the economic interests and those of us who have studied the history of the modern megachurch understand this is because Christianity has been turned into a puppet of neoliberalism... which was the industrialists intention from the beginning.
Christians think this modern conservative movement is their ally but 100 years ago they knew better. People died in the war against their economic leaders... now all has been forgotten after a century of propaganda.
Exactly. Roberts is trying to keep what little legitimacy the court has left so they can rubber stamp for corporations (their true goal)
Planned Parenthood was intended to give democrat parents advise on raising better children. Finding that to be nearly impossible, PP opted to persuade democrat women to not have children at all via abortion.
Bla bla bla bla....
It’s good they sided with the majority of Americans. ‼️ Most states supreme courts are composed of mostly seniors(men) over the age of 78. We need age and term limits that represent women under 40. ✋
Only because there was no standing, no damages, to file the case, not because the conservative judges are ok with the drug, which is hinted at in the ruling.
So it's just about "standing", not really about allowing access to the drug? It can still be challenged by someone who does have standing? Vote 🗳
Yes. Yes, it can. That was exactly the message that was sent: "This was the wrong litigant. Find a better one and try again."
"How often do you hear Unanimous with regard to the Supreme Court"? Literally all the time, it just does not suit your agenda to point that out.
Bladibladibladibla....
SCOTUS is maintaining balanced positions. This overall reinforces that the FDA and drug/medication control is an entirely federal issue at hand. If individual states were allowed to restrict medications then it would totally break the healthcare system
No balance at all. SCOTUS used standing to bail out and avoid the dispute. SCOTUS is now a captive of the far right and big business; has declared moral bankrupcy via Thomas and Alito.
This finding is extremely significant for those who are paying attention. It proves that the court is not loyal to its religious values. It actually places the demands of the pharmaceutical industry first.
What makes this important to understand is that means the religious values are a tool of the economic interests and those of us who have studied the history of the modern megachurch understand this is because Christianity has been turned into a puppet of neoliberalism... which was the industrialists intention from the beginning.
Christians think this modern conservative movement is their ally but 100 years ago they knew better. People died in the war against their economic leaders... now all has been forgotten after a century of propaganda.
Exactly, what if a state government disagreed with the legality and availability of addiction treatment drugs like buprenorphine? Or HIV prevention/treatment medications? Or opioid pain medications? And obviously, birth control in any form? Not only would it be a logistical nightmare, whether a person can receive treatment for multiple conditions could be limited entirely by the state they live in and the state's government that doesn't have a single doctor in it. Unfortunately conservatives want that, but at least today they didn't get it.
And it would reveal they are capable of resisting their corporate owners. Not happening.
You know you’ve lost the fuckin plot when even Justices Thomas and Alito say, “naw, even this is too loony for us.”
Good day for women, bad day for fascism.
and a bad day if you're not born yet, but what can a democrat baby be worth anyway?
@@tompastian3447
Women's medical decisions is no one's business.
@@Dagger-Deep Tell that to the baby. If he could talk, he'd tell you being aborted and killed is not something he wants, nor would you.
@@tompastian3447
Floating blobs aren't humans. 🙄
@@Dagger-Deep You were once a floating blob. You were also totally helpless after you were born. You needed constant care. You can't just plop a baby in a crib and expect it to live.
That shows you how political the maga justices are. They ban the Roe - after 2020 election but allow the abortion pill - before 2024 election. But as a woman I will never forget and that's why I will vote blue 💙.
No voting Kennedy?
women must vote to save their lives in november. simple as that. vote blue no matter who.
Wasn't banned, but left up to the state.
Thank Goodness!!!! This is Healthcare for women!!!
first rule in a free country, leave others alone
second rule in a free country, do not force your religious or political ideologies on others
third rule in a free country, stop demanding everything from a government
the reporter either doesnt follow the supreme court very much or is purposely trying to spread information about the court because the court is UNANIMOUS around 50% of the time every year. why did he feel the need to lie
Legal standing refers to the ability of a party to bring a lawsuit in court based upon their stake in the outcome. To have standing, a party must demonstrate a sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged.
In the context of _Hollingsworth v. Perry_ (2013), the issue of legal standing was central to the Supreme Court's decision.
*Background of the Perry Case*
_Hollingsworth v. Perry_ involved a challenge to California's Proposition 8, a ballot initiative that amended the state constitution to define marriage as between one man and one woman, effectively banning same-sex marriage. Two same-sex couples sued, arguing that Proposition 8 violated the U.S. Constitution.
*Proceedings and Standing Issue*
*District Court:* The U.S. District Court ruled that Proposition 8 was unconstitutional. The state officials named as defendants (e.g., the Governor and Attorney General of California) chose not to defend the law.
*Intervenors:* Proponents of Proposition 8 (the original supporters and sponsors of the ballot measure) intervened to defend it.
*Ninth Circuit:* The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals asked the California Supreme Court whether the proponents of a ballot initiative had standing under California law to defend the initiative when public officials refused to do so. The California Supreme Court said they did. The Ninth Circuit then found Proposition 8 unconstitutional as well.
*Supreme Court Review*
The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to address whether the petitioners (the proponents of Proposition 8) had standing to appeal the District Court's decision.
*Legal Standing in the Supreme Court's Decision*
*Article III Requirements:* For a party to have standing in federal court, they must meet three criteria under Article III of the Constitution:
*Injury-in-Fact:* The party must have suffered an actual or imminent injury.
*Causation:* There must be a causal connection between the injury and the conduct complained of.
*Redressability:* It must be likely, not merely speculative, that a favorable court decision will redress the injury.
Proponents' Standing: The Supreme Court ruled that the proponents of Proposition 8 did not meet these criteria. Specifically:
The proponents did not suffer a direct, personal injury from the invalidation of Proposition 8. Their interest was in seeing the law enforced, not a particularized injury.
The Court noted that the generalized interest of a citizen or group in seeing the law upheld was not sufficient to confer standing.
*Outcome*
The Supreme Court concluded that the proponents of Proposition 8 did not have standing to appeal the District Court's decision. As a result, the Court did not address the merits of the constitutional arguments against Proposition 8. The judgment of the Ninth Circuit was vacated, and the case was remanded with instructions to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Consequently, the District Court's ruling that Proposition 8 was unconstitutional remained in effect, allowing same-sex marriages to resume in California.
In summary, the _Perry_ case illustrates how standing requirements can prevent parties from appealing decisions if they do not demonstrate a concrete, personal injury, even if they have a strong interest in the issue at stake.
I'm sure it will be brought up again.
@@moondoddler370 There will always be another court challenge.
thank goodness
Religion sometimes be the root of all evil I can say that cuz I’m Christian but a lot negative things be happening be from my own religion
Sometimes?
Well, it certainly wasn’t for all of the 20th century ( the bloodiest in all recorded human history.) Political ideology was the culprit. Religious convictions are what mainly ended the entire institution of slavery.
Always!
@@johnnyboy6707 don’t you lie to me I’m from Mississippi born and raised we got documents that don’t teach a lot about slavery in books that a lot Americans don’t know so that statement you presented was very false and misinform
@@Tri.dawg1 Why don’t you read a little about the 18th and 19th century abolitionist movements..might learn something.
Doctors should have a right because they swore an oath to protect their patients. Also consultations are usually free so…
AS THEY FLY THEIR FLAGS UPSIDE DOWN
Better than the rainbow
Wait a minute….I think they said unanimously….but I thought…
Lol dude, my aunt took abortion pills while testing positive for pregnancy. 8 months later, the baby was born with it's tounge growing out of its ear and eyes the size of plums. The eyes were so big that they were outside the eye sockets, and the eye lids were the only thing keeping them inside the baby's head. It was absolutely horrifying, the baby lived for about 40 minutes. They wanted me to "see my cousin" before the doctors disposed of the corpse, and I have to say it was probably one of the most disgusting things I have ever seen in my life.,
I'm sorry, there has to be a better way for abortion then. To make sure it's not viable
Cool story.......
@@elijahFree2000they're so desperate they make up stories to scare people.
And it never happened.
Now they need to rule on NO presidential immunity for Trump the same way 9-0
💯
A zygote is not a person... Consiousness is achieved usually through shock of birth.
Bernard I love you & everyone else in Jesus
First and Last its the women's body not theirs!!
Good. 👍🏾
Cave men knew birds/ bees = child / no one can kill
You clearly know absolutely nothing about human history. Several plants that can cause abortions became extinct thousands of years ago because of how often they were used. And any baby that a woman/the tribe or town didn't want for whatever reason (abnormalities, unable to feed yet another person, etc) would literally just be left in the woods.
....why is it ok for these people to killtheir unborn babies?
Because its not a baby.
@@86Corvus prove to me that a fetus isn't a baby.
Its a fetus. It doesnt even have its organs formed.
Peope, remember it is for birthing people, not women lol.
So, you don't think that women are people.
Duly noted.
People remember that forced birthers think women came from a rib bone.
baal is laughing
Mickey Mouse is with him in fantasy land.
Imagine if people could just take responsibility for their actions instead of resorting to the murder of their progeny.
Assuming you’re pro life when does that mindset end? Once the baby is living in a foster care system, or are you only pro life to kids in the U.S and not the kids getting bombs dropped on them?
This decision does not rule on the merits of abortion. It only rules that a group of doctors do not have legal standing to challenge the FDA's regulation of the medication in the courts.
@@fernandococom5970The kids getting bombs dropped on them are casualties of war…not purposely targeted for termination. Get the difference?!
@@johnnyboy6707 Israel isn’t as innocent as Fox News is letting you to believe, they have committed human right violations for purposely targeting civilians. Get the difference?
You guys need to learn how to mind your own business.
first rule in a free country, leave others alone
second rule in a free country, do not force your religious or political ideologies on others
third rule in a free country, stop demanding everything from a government