|
Chris Geidner@chrisgeidner.bsky.social |
BREAKING: The Supreme Court rejects challenge to abortion medication drug mifepristone, holding that the plaintiffs lack standing. The opinion, by Kavanaugh, is unanimous. Thomas concurs. www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23p...
20 replies 113 reposts 281 likes
|
sal12.bsky.social
@sal12.bsky.social
[ View ] |
So the actual issue, restricting access for women, will wait til republicans come up with some other phony plaintiff, and it's not an election year.
0 replies 0 reposts 4 likes
|
Rutrow
@rutrow.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Did Alito use the opinion to tell the plaintiffs EXACTLY how to bring their next action to remedy that standing problem? or will he be sending a private note later?
1 replies 1 reposts 5 likes
|
wildmonkeysects™
@wildmonkeysects.bsky.social
[ View ] |
RU 486? No, Pentium.
1 replies 0 reposts 4 likes
|
Zork Aficionado
@zorkaficionado.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Do you know how bad your anti-abortion case has to be constructed for Alito, Kav and Thomas to concur with it's dismissal? Good lord.
0 replies 2 reposts 5 likes
|
サージャントヒッピー
@sgthippie.bsky.social
[ View ] |
It’s insane that it made it that far.
1 replies 0 reposts 13 likes
|
BlepBork
@blepbork.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Conservatives are very patient. They’ll try again.
1 replies 1 reposts 13 likes
|
James Debord
@jamesdebord.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Can't wait to read Thomas' concurrence.
1 replies 0 reposts 7 likes
|
Seentoomuch
@seentoomuch.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Is this another Thomas "Here's how you can get me/them to rule the way you want next time," concurrence/dissent?
1 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
☭ Comrade ☭
@nowarbutclasswar.bsky.social
[ View ] |
This is Thomas and Alito signaling they needed more money to rule differently
0 replies 0 reposts 14 likes
|
Wayne Fryback
@waynefryback.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Hooray!
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Tom Keck
@tmksyracuse.bsky.social
[ View ] |
0 replies 0 reposts 2 likes
|
Bill Stewart
@billstewart.bsky.social
[ View ] |
That doesn't mean they'd disapprove of a law banning the drug. I do know one pro-lifer who contends that banning a drug only made to kill babies is no different than gun control banning a tool made to kill adults (and therefore opposes it, because 2nd Amendment.)
1 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Matt
@mtblah.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Rejected on lack of standing so they can hear the case with different plaintiffs when it’s not an election year, I imagine
1 replies 2 reposts 18 likes
|
isobel
@isobel.top
[ View ] |
unless i'm misreading something, this is good right? whenever they do something good it kinda terrifies me, because it means their next decision is going to be absolutely monstrous
4 replies 0 reposts 39 likes
|
Matthew
@calmeilles.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Will pro-lifers now be hanging Kavanaugh in effigy?
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Alan Jackson
@akjackson.bsky.social
[ View ] |
A tactical retreat to try to support Trump.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
CNY Big D
@pat0615.bsky.social
[ View ] |
It's bullshit, with all the bad press they are just throwing us a bone.
2 replies 1 reposts 6 likes
|
James
@battlehork.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Wait, not only is it good but Kavanaugh wrote the opinion? I'm confused.
2 replies 0 reposts 12 likes
|
maraleia
@maraleia.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Thank god.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
|
Chris Geidner
@chrisgeidner.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Second decision is Vidal v. Elster. The "Trump Too Small" plaintiff loses, with SCOTUS reversing the Federal Circuit. There is no dissent to Thomas's opinion for the court, but there are four opinions in all. www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23p...
1 replies 4 reposts 29 likes