Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Nevilledog

(55,082 posts)
Wed Apr 12, 2023, 07:42 PM Apr 2023

A Scalia Clerk Dismantles the Medication Abortion Decision

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2023/04/medication-abortion-mifepristone-ruling-errors.html


On Friday, U.S. District Court Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk issued an order overturning the FDA’s approval of mifepristone. The order will take effect within seven days unless it is stayed or reversed by a higher court.

The court holds that the plaintiffs have standing, that their lawsuit was filed on time, that their lawsuit can proceed even though they did not make their arguments to the FDA, and that they win on the merits. Each of these holdings is egregiously wrong. This excerpt will walk through the court’s errors on the issue of standing, which are sufficient to establish that a higher court should stay and ultimately reverse Judge Kacsmaryk’s decision.

ADVERTISEMENT

The plaintiffs are organizations of pro-life doctors seeking to overturn the FDA’s approval of mifepristone in 2000. Under a 2013 Supreme Court case called Clapper v. Amnesty International USA, the plaintiffs bear the burden of proving a “certainly impending” injury from the FDA’s approval of mifepristone. Neither the organizations, nor their doctor-members, can meet that standard. The plaintiffs’ philosophical disagreement with abortion does not give them standing to seek a federal court order banning all doctors nationwide from prescribing mifepristone to their patients.

The district court nonetheless finds that the plaintiffs have both associational standing (based on injuries suffered by their doctor-members) and organizational standing (based on injuries to the organizations themselves). Both holdings are profoundly wrong.

The court starts with associational standing. It begins by reciting assertions from the plaintiffs’ filings and declaring, without additional analysis, that they establish standing. For example, the court quotes the plaintiffs’ assertions that “chemical abortion drugs can overwhelm the medical system” and “consume crucial limited resources” such as “blood for transfusions.”

*snip*


4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
A Scalia Clerk Dismantles the Medication Abortion Decision (Original Post) Nevilledog Apr 2023 OP
Which District Court does this Judge rule from? msfiddlestix Apr 2023 #1
He's in Amarillo... The ONLY judge and that's why they always file before him. Nevilledog Apr 2023 #2
thank you. n/t msfiddlestix Apr 2023 #3
Good read! K&R for visibility. crickets Apr 2023 #4
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»A Scalia Clerk Dismantles...