The Plaintiffs Trying to Ban the Abortion Pill Admitted They Have No Case

[BlueWaveNeverEnd]

Every litigant who comes into federal court needs to establish that they are injured in some way. Here, plaintiffs are doctors who claim that mifepristone leads to them having to treat patients with complications. Put aside for our purposes here just how insane that argument is—doctors treat people with complications related to medicine all the time, it’s their job. For now though, just appreciate that this is their claimed harm.

As their lawyer explained at argument, the doctors “allege that they treated women who were presenting emergency medical situations” after using mifepristone. And that doing so, their lawyer said, “severely impacts the ability of doctors to practice medicine according to their medical oaths” because treating these patients is “more time-consuming” and “consumes an enormous amount of resources.” The lawyer later described two situations where two of the plaintiffs say that they had to save the life of a patient after taking mifepristone.

In the complaint, there are more harms claimed. Plaintiffs claim patients suffer from complications due to medication abortion as well as being deprived knowledge about what is really happening to them. They claim that doctors suffer, not only from having to treat complications (as discussed at the hearing), but also because medication abortion demeans the practice of medicine, ruins the doctor-patient relationship, and forces antiabortion doctors to complete abortions against their morals. And for antiabortion physician organizations, medication abortion forces them to divert resources away from their members because they are forced to spend time challenging the legality of these drugs. A principal focus of the hearing, however, was this claim that doctors were being distracted from other more important medical care by mifepristone-related emergencies.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/the-plaintiffs-trying-to-ban-the-abortion-pill-admitted-they-have-no-case/ar-AA18U2mY

[ancianita]

1. Every litigant is represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom, a HUGE network of right wing

lawyers out to preserve all patriarchal dominance in this nation. They are funded by the Koch right wing network that bought the SCOTUS. https://adflegal.org/for-attorneys (click on the upper left logo for their front page; their lawyers number in the tens to hundreds)

Because of this suit and TX political culture behind it, Texas pharmaceutical firms don't or won't distribute Mifepristone.

One of them is McKesson Pharmaceuticals in which distributes drugs to the nation's Costco's, but will not distribute Mifepristone; I found that out yesterday from my local female Costco pharmacist. She said it's a management decision they can do nothing about.

This bullshit might or might not fly in TX courts, but it's mostly intended to bring down the FDA, one of Koch's goals to end government.

[Buns_of_Fire]

2. Doctors complaining about having to practice medicine?

Sounds like they might be in the wrong profession.

Either way, since treating someone with a serious medical problem seems to interfere with more important things, they obviously don't need those medical licenses anymore.

[Takket]

3. Wow. I haven't studied the case. Didn't realize their claims were so flimsy

I mean, if the doctors think treating complications from a med is a waste of their time, shouldn’t they be asking the court to ban ALL prescription drugs???

Why this one drug? (I mean, we know why. The rethug way is to do these things backwards. You start with the conclusion that you want abortion banned and work backwards inventing a hypothesis you can give to some corrupt judge so they have some billshit reason to give you what you want).

[sanatanadharma]

4. By this argument, emergency rooms should be shut down as they take resources from other care

By this argument, emergency rooms should be shut down as they take resources from other care.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

5. Ban Viagra because of priapism emergencies. . . . nt

[Buckeyeblue]

6. So any drug with a side effect could be challenged under this logic

The judge must be having a difficult time figuring out a legal argument to rule for the plaintiffs, or else he would have issued his ruling by now.

[3Hotdogs]

7. Yeah. All the shit you see advertised on cable....

[Scrivener7]

11. I would have thought pharmaceutical companies would be funding a big rebuttal to this.

[Raven123]

8. What a Pandora's box

[Mr. Evil]

9. Ever notice how

some RWNJ organization that exists only to diminish or to outright take away individual rights almost always name their entities 'blah blah Freedom' or 'Freedom blah blah?' If there's an organization out there with 'Freedom' in its name it usually means the exact opposite.

[BlueWaveNeverEnd]

12. yep. what women run Liberty group... runs around banning books that mention race

Liberty from reading i guess

[dlk]

10. This has been the radical right's method for years

Throw everything against a wall to see what sticks. When something eventually does, they build on it from there. They are dismantling our government protections (and our democracy) piece by piece in a patient, methodical and well-funded way.

This latest coordinated assault on women’s health and autonomy to make their own medical decisions and rob them of their freedom is just the beginning.

[BlueWaveNeverEnd]

13. women, and men who care about women, need to vote in huge numbers in 2024

[dlk]

14. It is the only thing that will save us

There is a reason Republicans have seriously ramped up their voter suppression efforts. They understand most of us are on to them.