Texas judge halts FDA approval of abortion pill

Texas judge halts FDA approval of abortion pill - POLITICO

A Texas federal judgeruled Friday eveningto suspend the FDA’s approval of mifepristone — one of two drugs used together to cause an abortion — virtually banning the sale of the pills across the country. The decision, however, will not take effect for a week, giving higher courts time to consider the appeal the Biden administration filed Friday night and delaying for now the impact on hundreds of thousands of patients who use the medication both for abortions and treating miscarriages.

U.S. District Court Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk in Amarillo, Texas, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, sided with anti-abortion medical groups that challenged the federal regulation of the drug, ruling that both the initial approval of the pills in 2000 as well as more recent FDA decisions allowing them to be prescribed via telemedicine, sent by mail and dispensed at retail pharmacies, are unlawful.

Wild.

Is there an actual scientific/health reason for this? Or is it just more of the same 3rd world conservative garbage?

He milked it for all it was worth. Only the poor and disenfranchised will pay.

This is really just more right-wing religious ideology infect government, but I know you know that. I don't really see it as a big deal. All the FDA has to do is reapprove the drug if its approval is reversed by the courts. I'm not sure why the crazy right thinks this is going to amount to anything, but I guess their insane religious beliefs compel them to try. The FDA can reapprove it with even more evidence that it is safe, and if the fanatical right wants to challenge it again, the FDA can just keep reapproving it.

What are they even trying to do? Is there strategy to it, or just knee-jerk reactions to be contrarian?

Holy shitballs, people, the joke is over. Time to get through this and go back to some semblance of common sense.

You don't have to be a liberal or vote democrat, but FFS stop this nonsense.

No, it is literally safer than tylenol.

And yes, they're trying to take us back the the 1800's. Child labor, no regulations to protect people, women have less say, and non-whites count as 2/5 of a person.

A little late to halt the approval, isn't it?

This should be a warning to everyone - never trust a republican. They are inherently dishonest. They will never change.

Republican voters I don't even think trust Republicans. I think they're more voting against Democrats than voting for Republicans. Sad way to live, not believing in something positive and constructive.

Very fast and very far action like this is a political risk because the change already so far is keeps this on the mind of the voter and we see what happenes in the past mid term.

What exactly regarding the actual opinion did you disagree with? I didn't see the ruling/text linked anywhere in the OP or the link.

I haven't read to much up on what forced-birthers use as language, but given what is mentioned in the article, I don't think there is any scientific reason behind it.

The judge’s decision includes language commonly used by anti-abortion advocates, describing the intent of the pill as one “to kill the unborn human,” referring to abortion providers as “abortionists,” and describing the “intense psychological trauma” of people who use the pills and then see “the remains of their aborted children.”

7 questions from the Texas ruling on abortion pills - POLITICO

“The Court does not second-guess FDA’s decision-making lightly,” he wrote. “But here, FDA acquiesced on its legitimate safety concerns — in violation of its statutory duty — based on plainly unsound reasoning and studies that did not support its conclusions. There is also evidence indicating FDA faced significant political pressure to forego its proposed safety precautions to better advance the political objective of increased ‘access’ to chemical abortion — which was the ‘whole idea of mifepristone.’”

I have seen no consensus showing this, and some of that seems like fiction. I can only find the opposite,

• Noem's Misleading Claim About Safety of Medication Abortion - FactCheck.org
• Research shows medication abortions are safe | AP News

• Are Abortion Pills Safe? Here’s the Evidence. - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

More than 100 scientific studies, spanning continents and decades, have examined the effectiveness and safety of mifepristone and misoprostol, the abortion pills that are commonly used in the United States. All conclude that the pills are a safe method for terminating a pregnancy.

Also,

The Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative Christian legal group that brought the case on behalf of providers who oppose abortion, argued that the FDA went beyond its authority when it approved the medication.

Lol. This whole situation is a clown show.

Yup. This is such a shitty hill to die on as we saw in the 2022 mid-terms, why are they doing these extreme political stunts lol.

I know you can copy and paste other people's views and opinions, but what are your thoughts on the actual decision/ruling itself?

I know you didn't ask me but my thoughts are the GOP is no longer small government. They want to stick their noses in every aspect of individuals personal lives, not just with this decision.

I may have missed it, but the plaintiffs which challenged this... were they state governments as well? The OP link calls them "anti-abortion medical groups" which is vague, but I don't have high expectations from journalists these days.

But I completely agree with their views and opinions, so citation shouldn't really tilt anyone. Also I didn't just post opinions, it was a fact check and another link that cited 100+ studies showing the Judge was wrong on a factual basis. My post was quite clear in precisely what I disagreed with.

Judge:

What did the judge say?

Kacsmaryk ruled that both the initial approval of the pills in 2000 and a more recent decision to allow them to be prescribed via telemedicine were unlawful.

“The Court does not second-guess FDA’s decision-making lightly,” he wrote. “But here, FDA acquiesced on its legitimate safety concerns — in violation of its statutory duty — based on plainly unsound reasoning and studies that did not support its conclusions. There is also evidence indicating FDA faced significant political pressure to forego its proposed safety precautions to better advance the political objective of increased ‘access’ to chemical abortion — which was the ‘whole idea of mifepristone.’

The judge’s decision includes language commonly used by anti-abortion advocates, describing the intent of the pill as one “to kill the unborn human,” referring to abortion providers as “abortionists,” and describing the “intense psychological trauma” of people who use the pills and then see “the remains of their aborted children.”

Me:

I have seen no scientific consensus showing this, and some of that bolded seems like fiction. I can only find the opposite,

• Noem's Misleading Claim About Safety of Medication Abortion - FactCheck.org
• Research shows medication abortions are safe | AP News
• Are Abortion Pills Safe? Here’s the Evidence. - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

It's a simple situation of me not believing the Judge's statements on a pure factual level.

Apart from simple science, I also agree with these companies and the Justice Department as to why it was wrong:

Justice Department appeals Texas abortion pill ruling - The Washington Post

Drugmakers and biopharma groups blast Texas judge's abortion pill decision (nbcnews.com)

Kacsmaryk’s ruling, Justice Department lawyers said, had “upended decades of reliance by blocking FDA’s approval of mifepristone and depriving patients of access to this safe and effective treatment, based on the court’s own misguided assessment of the drug’s safety.

After the 2022 mid-terms why is he dying on this hill again lol. A political disaster, and completely unsupported by the science to boot.

Why use critical thinking when you can use others opinions as your own?

What statements, exactly? You're copying and pasting someone else's input which included a small snippet of the ruling ... yet no link to the ruling itself? Very bizarre copy and pasting, unless ChatGPT?

They aren't other people's opinions. It's a logical conclusion I came to after reading his statements and then researching studies on this drug.

I literally even bolded them on the first reply because I know how annoying you are when you're defending a losing topic:

“The Court does not second-guess FDA’s decision-making lightly,” he wrote. “But here, FDA acquiesced on its legitimate safety concerns —in violation of its statutory duty — based on plainly unsound reasoning and studies that did not support its conclusions."

This is incorrect going by the studies. How is this difficult. 😂

What a shitty hill to die on with a shitty defense. "This poster linked 100s of peer reviewed studies and he wrote/published neither of them! I'm totally having a real argument here and not just being annoying!"

You've been mad at my frequent peer reviewed citation for years now and I love how angry it always gets you. 😊 Hard to get around the data, so attack "copy paste".

Anyway I completely agree with this statement:

Kacsmaryk’s ruling, Justice Department lawyers said, had “upended decades of reliance by blocking FDA’s approval of mifepristone and depriving patients of access to this safe and effective treatment, based on the court’s own misguided assessment of the drug’s safety.

Asking for your thoughts is annoying...? Means someone is mad? I know the internet is serious business though.

Where is the defense, exactly? Is asking for your input and the actual opinion from the decision an example of "defense?" Like I said, I didn't see the ruling/text linked anywhere in the OP or the link itself so was curious to see what the fuss was about.

Edit: *crickets*

I love that we have a mod that's simultaneously a troll. Weird but funny.

@kathaariancode: Nah. Just a right winger. Not a troll. They practice the ability to cast doubt on anything they see as negative toward their beliefs or position on any single issue by asking pointless questions in attempt to minimize the importance of that which is critical of those beliefs or positions. Typical right wing M. O.

As you are here, instead of focusing on the conclusion, he’ll demand debate on non-critical aspects of the case in order to deflect and attack.

sadly correct.

I see the tribalism here casts doubt on critical thinking skills. I have consistently showcased very pro-choice ideas (some would even consider them extreme left) at Gamespot including any (safe/reasonable) medications there-in to facilitate such constructs.

Can you articulate what makes you even think the opposite here? Let's see those critical thinking skills put to the test.

Apart from going against most science on the topic, it also uses extreme ideological language.

Abortion pill ruling embraces anti-abortion movement's terms and ideology, experts say (nbcnews.com)

In interviews, several legal and medical experts said Kacsmaryk’s decision was unprecedented and clearly ideological. His language and reasoning, they said, closely mirrored arguments and concepts put forward by the anti-abortion movement — at the expense of scientific consensus in some instances.

Hard to defend this ruling.

Oh and,

Kacsmaryk, a Trump appointee, earlier in his career represented a Christian conservative legal group that sued the federal government challenging the part of the Affordable Care Act that required employers to provide free insurance coverage for birth control.

Such wording, experts said, references the concept of "fetal personhood": the idea promoted by the anti-abortion movement that a fetus should be recognized as a person with constitutional rights from the moment of conception. Under that theory — which many legal analysts and abortion rights advocates oppose — an abortion would be considered murder.

"You will not find in the federal Constitution any terminology about embryo," said Michele Goodwin, a professor of law at the University of California, Irvine, adding: "You will not find the term 'fetus.' You will not find the term 'unborn child.'"

Lmao.

Anyway this is political suicide, and even some far right personalities know this and are against it. To defend this means you're so far right that you want to actually hurt your party. Oof.

Americans want medication abortion to remain legal | Ipsos

Two-thirds of Americans say that medication abortion should remain legal in the United States, including 84% of Democrats, 67% of independents, and 49% of Republicans.

Oof.

surprised some antivax wackjob hasn't brought similar suits for covid vaccine approval.

why stop there? lets roll back polio and amoxicillin while we're at it!

but don't touch muh viagra!