General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsTrump-Appointed Judge Cites Wildlife Cases As a Reason to Ban Abortion Pills
Trump-Appointed Judge Cites Wildlife Cases As a Reason to Ban Abortion PillsBut Fifth Circuit Judge James Howho was sworn in by Justice Clarence Thomas in GOP megadonor Harlan Crows library in 2018wanted his colleagues go even further. He would have fully reversed the Food and Drug Administration approval of the abortion pill, and he used some uh, wild, reasons to support his argument. Ho wrote in his unhinged concurrence that the plaintiffs, a group of anti-abortion doctors, have standing in the case because they like looking at babies, and the FDAs approval of the abortion pill deprives them of that right. He cites aesthetic injury precedent from past cases involving federal decisions that threatened wildlife and plants:

Ho cites cases including Sierra Club v. Morton from 1972 and Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife from 1992 and others in which courts granted standing for various parties to sue, like when a government agency allowed more hunting depleting the supply of animals . . . that . . . [plaintiffs] seek to view, or an agency authorized the use of pesticides that would harm beetles and butterflies that plaintiffs intended to view, or permitting for development that would diminish the wildlife population visible to [birdwatchers].
Its....pretty close to comparing women and pregnant people to wild animals! And he kept going!
----
I actually meant to include this in a previous post I made about Judge Ho, but I got lazy and left it as-is: DU - Judge James Ho (CA5) is a Clarence Thomas stunt double (re mifepristone case)
dchill
(42,660 posts)... an aesthetic injury.
Right?!
dchill
(42,660 posts)Mad_Machine76
(24,958 posts)Its nuts. Not that anybody cares about that sort of thing anymore.
Hekate
(100,133 posts)
nicknamed Peanut. Shes supposed to enter 7th grade in a few weeks. From the description I read, she and her family are expressing all kinds of overwhelming aesthetic pleasure every time they look at that kid.
Have I mentioned today just how much I hate American right wingers?
sinkingfeeling
(57,835 posts)2naSalit
(102,803 posts)Can we revoke his membership with our species?
Midnight Writer
(25,410 posts)58Sunliner
(6,331 posts)Solly Mack
(96,943 posts)Nevilledog
(55,082 posts)Solly Mack
(96,943 posts)I enjoy seeing conservatives tarred and feathered. I'm being harmed. (since no one is tarring and feathering them)
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)The parallel is in claiming the legal precedent. Fetuses are to doctors and presumably future passersby who would have enjoyed coochy-cooing at them in parks as birds are to those who'd enjoy "oh-looking" at them.
ProPublica and others confirmed Ho's swearing in by Thomas in Harlan Crow's Dallas library some time ago.
So did Cancun Cruz proudly at the time, though he didn't mention where this photo was taken.

MagickMuffin
(18,318 posts)
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)The big, high-stakes cases she's been successfully involved in would make a good horror movie for liberals, once they were culled down to a dozen or so of the most hair-raising.
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)Judges can make up any old crap they want in service of reverse-engineering the desired result. Whether it's stove-piping the concept of "aesthetic injury" or the written rantings of a medieval witch hunter, it's all part of jurisprudence in these here United States.
mahatmakanejeeves
(69,854 posts)Ho didn't. It starts on page 65.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca5.213145/gov.uscourts.ca5.213145.543.1_1.pdf
The next page gives us this gem:
If Strunk and White were alive today ...
In It to Win It
(12,651 posts)mahatmakanejeeves
(69,854 posts)In It to Win It
(12,651 posts)It was a very depressing read.
I was sighing just about after every paragraph.

struggle4progress
(126,157 posts)Maeve
(43,457 posts)F off, old man
KentuckyWoman
(7,401 posts)The whole point of anti-abortion laws is that an unborn human child is also a child of God. The assumption is there is a big difference between managing animal procreation and human procreation. ... Completely different than eating eggs (chicken abortion technically speaking).
If the GOP wants to jump in with this pile of hot mess then it's going to back fire. Because either all living beings are divine or humans aren't. We either all go vegan or we accept people are just "meat".
This is absurd.
In It to Win It
(12,651 posts)Hermit-The-Prog
(36,631 posts)Takket
(23,715 posts)purr-rat beauty
(1,257 posts)in the wild, the injured, ill, and meek are left for predators.
can we just leave babies all over the place to let nature take it's course?
edisdead
(3,396 posts)We are done as a society because right wing nutjobs.