Brett Kavanaugh Slipped a Big Poison Pill Into His Mifepristone Opinion

[mahatmakanejeeves]

JURISPRUDENCE
Brett Kavanaugh Slipped a Big Poison Pill Into His Mifepristone Opinion

BY DAHLIA LITHWICK AND MARK JOSEPH STERN
JUNE 13, 2024 • 5:03 PM

The Supreme Court on Thursday threw out a legal assault against the most common method of abortion, unanimously holding that the plaintiffs lacked standing to sue in the first place. Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s opinion for the court maintains access to mifepristone, the first drug in a medication abortion, which the Food and Drug Administration approved in 2000. The plaintiffs, a group of anti-abortion doctors and dentists, argued that federal courts must ban or roll back the public’s access to mifepristone in all 50 states, presenting objectively false claims about its alleged dangers. These activists, however, will not prescribe the drug or treat patients who’ve used it—and so, the court held, they have no right to challenge its approval in court.

Yet the decision was not a total defeat for anti-abortion activists. Among other things, Kavanaugh slipped language into his opinion that could expand protections for physicians who refuse to provide emergency abortions, potentially imperiling the lives of patients. On a bonus Slate Plus episode of Amicus, Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern discussed Kavanaugh’s concession to the anti-abortion movement. Their conversation has been edited and condensed for clarity.

{snip}

[Frasier Balzov]

1. Rejecting the case on standing is just an invitation to re-tool and come back.

They will be back and have declared their intention to cobble together some all-female plaintiff class.

[applegrove]

2. Women dying from pregnancy or childbirth is

the way God deemed it throughout history.

[BOSSHOG]

7. And then they can always break out

The quotes from Jesus Christ about how he so opposed abortion. And then quote the Bible about when life begins. And then use their tax exempt funds to try to codify their religious beliefs.

[Turbineguy]

3. That's always been there anyway.

Of course the opinion has to be written for the dumb-fucks of the republican party.

[Silent Type]

4. Well, it does seem to limit who has standing. If a dentist doesn't have standing, how's about a preacher?

I take this as a victory. As Honig — CNN so-called legal expert — a new case will take years to reach SC. There are some other cases headed to SC, but still. And I’m sure some states will claim they have standing.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

5. "I'm sure some states will claim they have standing."

Last edited Sat Jun 15, 2024, 04:48 AM - Edit history (1)

They already do. Those states are Missouri, Kansas, and Idaho.

And good morning.

[wolfie001]

6. This is Opus Dei thinking

He's a Catholic fanatic and that will be his deciding factor. He's not the only one on the SC. Looks like at least 4 of them. Zero consideration of a secular society. Doesn't even come up when they write down their opinions. The Founding Fathers were determined not to let religion rule our government. Not with these 6 clowns. Hope I'm wrong.

[LiberalFighter]

8. Insurance companies should declare any doctor or nurse services out of network

If they deny services or intentionally cause harm to a woman needing an abortion or other services needed by a pregnant woman.

The out of network coverage would apply for any medical services by the doctors or nurses.

[MOMFUDSKI]

9. They will have to rethink punishing docs

that are saving lives. My head is going bong de bong now!

[abbeyco]

10. Legislating from the bench?

Unless it’s ripping women’s rights away, isn’t this the kind of thing abhorrent to the wingnuts?

[FBaggins]

11. I tire of implications that the three liberal justices are idiots

They weren't "tricked" into agreeing to a unanimous ruling.

All three are more than capable of writing a brief concurring opinion saying that they agree with the results, but not with the "pill".

So it's either dicta or they agree.