If the Supreme Court decides that mifepristone should no longer be available, what is to stop activists from attempting the same kind of ban for other medications that have been shown to be much less safe (e.g., Viagra)? One imagines that there are many other drugs with less-safe track records than mifepristone; banning it could create an unintended slippery slope
that pharmaceutical companies would certainly not appreciate.
You raise an excellent point. Giving single judges the power to question the expertise and scientific evaluations of agencies like the FDA would call all manner of things into question, far beyond abortion drugs. It is a kind of power grab by the courts.
If you believe conspiracy theories, then COVID vaccines are next. Then all vaccines. You know they cause autism. Polio. What's that? Smallpox never heard of it. Cure these the way great grandma did with old fashion chicken pox and mumps and measles parties . Shingles doesn't care if you have had chicken pox. And then there is the next world wide plague. Whatever that will be. /s
It's prohibition all over again (we saw how well that worked out . . .). The fanatical American Taliban will try to ban anything they don't like, but if there is a demand, a grey/black market will spring up, and the demand will be filled. . . .
Since the multi-decade war on drugs has proved to be such an abject failure, we can expect a similar "war" to combat whatever these despicable fanatics want to ban with similar collateral damage (and eventually, criminal profits . . .).
"Add to the list plans to loosen up legality of child marriage"
It's there: Lower age of consent.
The edges of the Republican party has been in favor of pedophilia for years and has been steadily moving it's way to the center. Within a decade The GOP will be promoting it front and center.
Trump wants to claim Presidential Immunity. But apparently, the Branch of the US Gov’t that has “immunity” is SCOTUS. With a toothless Ethics Code, bought and paid for Justices, no appetite for self-recusal, and no buy-in from Congress for Judicial Reform, that's about as “immune” from accountability as they come.
They are not immune from impeachment, even if it is unlikely they would be removed. I hope that the House is retaken by the Democrats and an investigation is launched fully into Justice Thomas’s malfeasance.
If the Court Crowns Trump King, then they Crown Biden King too, and a sitting King is more powerful than a former King. In that case Biden would trump Trump! I am sure the justices on the Supreme Court aware of that too. Biden can already pardon his son if anything happens to him, but this would give him even more sweeping powers. He could imprison Trump and all of the MAGAs in power, and redo the gerrymandered maps. However, if Biden became king we would have to get rid of him too, because we don't want to be ruled by a King, as we let old King George know when we fought the American Revolution for our independence.
My opinion is there are very few if any ways for the SCOTUS to not uphold the Colorado ruling without looking like lickspittle hypocrites of the worst kind. In addition, it’s fallacious to assume they support him. So far they’ve yet to give Trump his way on any of his appeals.
In addition many of them are originalists and members of the federalist society which brought this suit in the first place. He’s threatened them and he threatens other fellow judges which doesn’t sit well with any member of the judiciary as they’re all part of an elite group. Plus, they know if he actually becomes president again he’s a danger to them too as very few dictators like judges that can stand in their way.
They’re well aware the best way they could possibly support the GOP would be to take Trump off the ballot and free the party to select a candidate that is more electable. And if THEY do it it will help disarm the entire notion that somehow the Democratic Party and Biden as “weaponized” the DOJ.
And lastly, they know the country is primed for violence and mass civil disobedience if he’s allowed to run. Better to stave that off now then to let it brew and become even more extreme by next November.
They know they’ve been handed an historic decision that will likely define their legacy. Overturning the Colorado ruling will open them up to justifiable criticism and mockery by future historians for perpetuity.
My opinion is they’re going to get political blowback regardless, so do they want to go down in history as being quisling cowards supporting a criminal and having most of the world ridicule them, or do they want to piss off MAGA and secure their legacy by following the constitution? I believe they’ll choose the latter because to let him off the hook will require them to go against virtually everything they’ve said they stand for.
Also, don’t forget that by removing Trump now they’re doing the GOP a huge favor and don’t think that’s lost on them either. If Trump becomes the republican party’s nominee and winds up with felony convictions, a situation that’s almost certain to happen, the Republican Party is in a real mess. Virtually any other candidate running is a Trump clone anyway, so what does it matter?
Yesterday's appeal hearing: "You're saying a president could sell pardons, could sell military secrets, could tell SEAL Team Six to assassinate a political rival?" Judge Florence Pan asked Trump lawyer D. John Sauer.
I would have asked "could tell SEAL Team Six to assassinate a political rival or a SCOTUS judge?"
Make it personal for the Supreme Court or anyone else who pisses off El Presidente. "It should would be sad if so-and-so fell down the stairs or out of a window or had a bad cup of tea?" he said.
Several states are not even letting women have abortions when the pregnancy is life-threatening. Take Kate Cox, for example. Another example is Yeniifer Alvarez-Estrada Glick, a 29 year-old Texas woman who died a few weeks after Roe was overturned. She would be alive if she'd had an abortion. Groups of women are filing lawsuits for this very reason in Tennessee and Texas (at least). The organization, Tennessee Right to Life (ironically named) is fighting even limited exceptions.
Maternal death rates are 62 percent higher in abortion-restriction states than in abortion-access states, and that's in a country that already had the highest maternal mortality rate in the developed world 😪
In light of how disturbing all of this is, and the fact that judges appointed by Trump have, so far, not followed the "perception of impartiality" rule to recuse. Please enjoy this Randy Rainbow clip that reflects the case where this impropriety is the most evident to date, the music is lovely!
Thank you for this analysis. I'm anxious to see how SOC rules. What a can of worms and a travesty they started with their abortion ruling! I live in Idaho and our abortion restrictions impact more than just the right for abortion. In the rural county I live in, in N Idaho, we lost women's healthcare out of our small local hospital and community completely. Providers all jumped ship. Women now have to travel an hour or more to give birth in a hospital and women's check-ups, etc require travel too. Something that can be difficult during winter. Additionally, with our shortage of providers already, this has created long waits to get in to the women's health providers remaining.
If the Supreme Court’s continuing to mess with Abortion inspires people to stay mad, and to remember why they are mad until we are past November 5, 2024, then I am ok with that. Because the immediate threat of Trump 2.0 Must. Be. Stopped.
It’s my belief the Court by its own logic is compelled to keep restricting by siding with the states on this question. The political consequences are a silver lining to this terrible tragedy for women.
I'm so sick of Biff and his crap that my head feels like it's going to explode. I don't have any faith at all that the Supreme Court will side with states who wish him off their ballots. He's gotten away with EVERYTHING in his life. He'll get away with this, too.
I have, maybe blindly, hope that SCOTUS will understand the total impact their ruling on immunity is. They are not just ruling for DJT, but for every POTUS to follow. Trump's legal team suggested Tuesday that even a president directing SEAL Team Six to kill a political opponent would be an action barred from prosecution given a former executive's broad immunity to criminal prosecution. That is not a President, but a despot!
I wonder if the court has considered that if Trump's argument that a president must first be impeached and convicted by the Senate before charges can be filed against him would have some serious consequences? We know that impeachment proceedings take months to reach the floor of the house and even longer for the issue to come before the senate for trial. That means that since a president can't be impeached after he leaves office (given that the function of impeachment is to remove him from office and nothing more), a president would be free to do anything he likes during the last month or two of his term and nothing could be done to stop him or punish him. A president with absolute power, even for a few hours, to say nothing of weeks and months, could destroy the country, start World War III, have his opponents killed, steal as much as he wanted from the treasury, sell secrets to our enemies, and there would be nothing to stop it.
Is anybody keeping an eye on the appeal by lawyers for a significent number of the convicted Jan 6th insurrectionists, against their conviction on the grounds that "obstruction of an official proceeding" is not valid grounds.
Imagine the size of the cocks crowing on MAGA dunghills if that is overthrown?
If the Supreme Court decides that mifepristone should no longer be available, what is to stop activists from attempting the same kind of ban for other medications that have been shown to be much less safe (e.g., Viagra)? One imagines that there are many other drugs with less-safe track records than mifepristone; banning it could create an unintended slippery slope
that pharmaceutical companies would certainly not appreciate.
You raise an excellent point. Giving single judges the power to question the expertise and scientific evaluations of agencies like the FDA would call all manner of things into question, far beyond abortion drugs. It is a kind of power grab by the courts.
Maybe then, the Pharmaceutical companies would stop donating to them.
If you believe conspiracy theories, then COVID vaccines are next. Then all vaccines. You know they cause autism. Polio. What's that? Smallpox never heard of it. Cure these the way great grandma did with old fashion chicken pox and mumps and measles parties . Shingles doesn't care if you have had chicken pox. And then there is the next world wide plague. Whatever that will be. /s
SCOTUS would never ban Viagra. That’s a dug for *men* that enables them to more readily have sex.
They’d only ban drugs for *women* that enable women to more freely have sex.
It's prohibition all over again (we saw how well that worked out . . .). The fanatical American Taliban will try to ban anything they don't like, but if there is a demand, a grey/black market will spring up, and the demand will be filled. . . .
Since the multi-decade war on drugs has proved to be such an abject failure, we can expect a similar "war" to combat whatever these despicable fanatics want to ban with similar collateral damage (and eventually, criminal profits . . .).
Ending birth control entirely is a goal. But not their end one.
End birth control.
Eliminate no fault divorce.
Lower age of consent.
These are all being pushed in red states and are mere steps to their ultimate goal: complete subjugation of women from as young an age as possible.
"Add to the list plans to loosen up legality of child marriage"
It's there: Lower age of consent.
The edges of the Republican party has been in favor of pedophilia for years and has been steadily moving it's way to the center. Within a decade The GOP will be promoting it front and center.
Trump wants to claim Presidential Immunity. But apparently, the Branch of the US Gov’t that has “immunity” is SCOTUS. With a toothless Ethics Code, bought and paid for Justices, no appetite for self-recusal, and no buy-in from Congress for Judicial Reform, that's about as “immune” from accountability as they come.
They are not immune from impeachment, even if it is unlikely they would be removed. I hope that the House is retaken by the Democrats and an investigation is launched fully into Justice Thomas’s malfeasance.
Not just launched, but rules of conduct implemented with an outside oversight committee developed.
If any SCOTUS judge is going to be impeached, it is Thomas. If he retires will his extra income stop?
If the Court Crowns Trump King, then they Crown Biden King too, and a sitting King is more powerful than a former King. In that case Biden would trump Trump! I am sure the justices on the Supreme Court aware of that too. Biden can already pardon his son if anything happens to him, but this would give him even more sweeping powers. He could imprison Trump and all of the MAGAs in power, and redo the gerrymandered maps. However, if Biden became king we would have to get rid of him too, because we don't want to be ruled by a King, as we let old King George know when we fought the American Revolution for our independence.
My opinion is there are very few if any ways for the SCOTUS to not uphold the Colorado ruling without looking like lickspittle hypocrites of the worst kind. In addition, it’s fallacious to assume they support him. So far they’ve yet to give Trump his way on any of his appeals.
In addition many of them are originalists and members of the federalist society which brought this suit in the first place. He’s threatened them and he threatens other fellow judges which doesn’t sit well with any member of the judiciary as they’re all part of an elite group. Plus, they know if he actually becomes president again he’s a danger to them too as very few dictators like judges that can stand in their way.
They’re well aware the best way they could possibly support the GOP would be to take Trump off the ballot and free the party to select a candidate that is more electable. And if THEY do it it will help disarm the entire notion that somehow the Democratic Party and Biden as “weaponized” the DOJ.
And lastly, they know the country is primed for violence and mass civil disobedience if he’s allowed to run. Better to stave that off now then to let it brew and become even more extreme by next November.
They know they’ve been handed an historic decision that will likely define their legacy. Overturning the Colorado ruling will open them up to justifiable criticism and mockery by future historians for perpetuity.
I fear that they would not do the right thing because of the blowback politically. We’ll have to see in the end.
My opinion is they’re going to get political blowback regardless, so do they want to go down in history as being quisling cowards supporting a criminal and having most of the world ridicule them, or do they want to piss off MAGA and secure their legacy by following the constitution? I believe they’ll choose the latter because to let him off the hook will require them to go against virtually everything they’ve said they stand for.
Also, don’t forget that by removing Trump now they’re doing the GOP a huge favor and don’t think that’s lost on them either. If Trump becomes the republican party’s nominee and winds up with felony convictions, a situation that’s almost certain to happen, the Republican Party is in a real mess. Virtually any other candidate running is a Trump clone anyway, so what does it matter?
Yesterday's appeal hearing: "You're saying a president could sell pardons, could sell military secrets, could tell SEAL Team Six to assassinate a political rival?" Judge Florence Pan asked Trump lawyer D. John Sauer.
I would have asked "could tell SEAL Team Six to assassinate a political rival or a SCOTUS judge?"
Make it personal for the Supreme Court or anyone else who pisses off El Presidente. "It should would be sad if so-and-so fell down the stairs or out of a window or had a bad cup of tea?" he said.
Several states are not even letting women have abortions when the pregnancy is life-threatening. Take Kate Cox, for example. Another example is Yeniifer Alvarez-Estrada Glick, a 29 year-old Texas woman who died a few weeks after Roe was overturned. She would be alive if she'd had an abortion. Groups of women are filing lawsuits for this very reason in Tennessee and Texas (at least). The organization, Tennessee Right to Life (ironically named) is fighting even limited exceptions.
Maternal death rates are 62 percent higher in abortion-restriction states than in abortion-access states, and that's in a country that already had the highest maternal mortality rate in the developed world 😪
https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2022/dec/us-maternal-health-divide-limited-services-worse-outcomes
WOW! That's so disturbing!
I find it disturbing that the ones who say they are "pro-life", aren't really at all.
Exactly. They should be called "forced birth".
This is a great group of MAGA's: Mothers Against Greg Abbott: https://mothersagainstgregabbott.com/
"The World Is Upside Down."
Isn't that ever the truth!I have never seen anything like the last couple years.Hoping very soon for the world to be right side up again.
Heaven help us...
In light of how disturbing all of this is, and the fact that judges appointed by Trump have, so far, not followed the "perception of impartiality" rule to recuse. Please enjoy this Randy Rainbow clip that reflects the case where this impropriety is the most evident to date, the music is lovely!
https://youtu.be/_zDXVw0aatQ?si=04Tu2snbp9hlRJhl
Honestly, after everything that's happened, I have no faith in SCOTUS whatsoever. The majority only seems to care about staying in power.
We would be wise to place little trust in SCOTUS.
Thank you for this analysis. I'm anxious to see how SOC rules. What a can of worms and a travesty they started with their abortion ruling! I live in Idaho and our abortion restrictions impact more than just the right for abortion. In the rural county I live in, in N Idaho, we lost women's healthcare out of our small local hospital and community completely. Providers all jumped ship. Women now have to travel an hour or more to give birth in a hospital and women's check-ups, etc require travel too. Something that can be difficult during winter. Additionally, with our shortage of providers already, this has created long waits to get in to the women's health providers remaining.
SCOTUS/Colorado could determine this as a State
decision, not just for CO, but
all states.
SCOTUS/Trump's immunity. The appellate court wasn't
impressed today with Trump's lawyers argument.
Sauer actually opened a can
of worms on immunity for a
sitting president. I'm hoping
and yes, praying, when it gets to SCOTUS, they'll refuse to hear it. They've done it to him before.
Trump will lose the immunity argument. The question is, how long will it take for him to lose it?
Thanks Jay for always making clear the "upside down".
If the Supreme Court’s continuing to mess with Abortion inspires people to stay mad, and to remember why they are mad until we are past November 5, 2024, then I am ok with that. Because the immediate threat of Trump 2.0 Must. Be. Stopped.
It’s my belief the Court by its own logic is compelled to keep restricting by siding with the states on this question. The political consequences are a silver lining to this terrible tragedy for women.
I’m really glad right now to be 69.
I'm so sick of Biff and his crap that my head feels like it's going to explode. I don't have any faith at all that the Supreme Court will side with states who wish him off their ballots. He's gotten away with EVERYTHING in his life. He'll get away with this, too.
A Textualist, you know ..
Will Beach House Flop Sandwich Suds
be THE Vote that saves his Best Bud ..
who made him a Somebody! on The Court
because he's the Divinely Directed sort .. once
a Top Member of Prep School Circle like Club . ..
Original Intent from The Get Go .. . # knowing detecter tests not admissible.
Originalism's original sin:
it's composed of Fed Soc fig leaves
whose main intent is to obscure
the motives of the thieves
The Things Big Chief ..
And then there's Long Dong, who survived a High Tech Lynching
and then had to endure Penny Pinching ..but
found a Mein Kampfy friend . . on whom he
and extra Judge Ginny could depend ...
Restored to Chosen for Heaven's work . .like
Touchy Sam and Our Lady . .grinning . ..
Dignity Has to Put Up With . .. # Feddy Kneel No Problem . ...
Well played, Sir John.
I have, maybe blindly, hope that SCOTUS will understand the total impact their ruling on immunity is. They are not just ruling for DJT, but for every POTUS to follow. Trump's legal team suggested Tuesday that even a president directing SEAL Team Six to kill a political opponent would be an action barred from prosecution given a former executive's broad immunity to criminal prosecution. That is not a President, but a despot!
I wonder if the court has considered that if Trump's argument that a president must first be impeached and convicted by the Senate before charges can be filed against him would have some serious consequences? We know that impeachment proceedings take months to reach the floor of the house and even longer for the issue to come before the senate for trial. That means that since a president can't be impeached after he leaves office (given that the function of impeachment is to remove him from office and nothing more), a president would be free to do anything he likes during the last month or two of his term and nothing could be done to stop him or punish him. A president with absolute power, even for a few hours, to say nothing of weeks and months, could destroy the country, start World War III, have his opponents killed, steal as much as he wanted from the treasury, sell secrets to our enemies, and there would be nothing to stop it.
Is anybody keeping an eye on the appeal by lawyers for a significent number of the convicted Jan 6th insurrectionists, against their conviction on the grounds that "obstruction of an official proceeding" is not valid grounds.
Imagine the size of the cocks crowing on MAGA dunghills if that is overthrown?
I am watching it but I don’t think as much is as on the line as some articles have suggested.