This article was updated on June 13 at 2:20 p.m. The Supreme Court on Thursday threw out a lawsuit seeking to roll back access to mifepristone, one of the two drugs used in medication abortions. In a unanimous decision, the court ruled that the doctors and medical groups challenging the expansion
  • DevCat@lemmy.world
    23·
    5 months ago

    Writing for the court, Justice Brett Kavanaugh acknowledged what he characterized as the challengers’ “sincere legal, moral, ideological, and policy objections” to elective abortion “by others” and to FDA’s relaxed regulation of mifepristone. But the challengers had not shown that they would be harmed by the FDA’s mifepristone policies, he explained, and under the Constitution, merely objecting to abortion and the FDA’s policies are not enough to bring a case in federal court. The proper place to voice those objections, he suggested, is in the political or regulatory arena.

    I’d almost thought the con side of SCOTUS had forgotten what standing even is.

    • evatronic@lemm.eeEnglish
      1·
      5 months ago

      In this case, remembering standing means they don’t have to double down and rule on abortion itself again.

        • Kaboom@reddthat.com
          24·
          5 months ago

          Roe v Wade was a court decision, when the congress should have it law. They had decades to fix it, and congress never got its act together.