Tuesday, April 11, 2023

WILL REPUBLICANS ON THE SUPREME COURT REALLY REJECT KACSMARYK?

So I see that smart people don't think Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk's ban on mifepristone will survive once it gets to the Supreme Court:


Heer thinks Amy Coney Barrett will vote to keep a method of abortion legal? Seriously? I'd say that even if Millhiser and Heer are correct, it'll be a 5-4 ruling at best. And that assumes Brett Kavanaugh plays along.

Adam Liptak of The New York Times also says the ruling might not stand.


Liptak cites a previous case in which Republicans on the Court sided with the Food and Drug Administration and reinstated mandatory in-person pickup of abortion drugs, a requirement that had been challenged at the height of COVID. But the result of this was to make it harder to get an abortion, not easier, so of course the right-wing justices were on the FDA's side. (But, Liptak writes, they said nice things about the FDA! And if they uphold Kacsmaryk's ruling now, they'll have to say bad things about the FDA! The Court, Liptak tells us, could "leave itself open to charges of inconsistency and opportunism"! Yes, we all know there's nothing a Federalist Society jurist hates more than appearing to be inconsistent and opportunistic.)

The experts Liptak cites think the Supreme Court will overturn the ruling because the case is bad -- the plaintiffs' claims of injury aren't valid and they waited too long to sue. A comparison is made to a 2021 Court decision that upheld the Affordable Care Act. And maybe that's right. The Court has rejected several challenges to the ACA -- but that pleases certain Big Business interests. And maybe this ruling will be overturned for the same reason...


FedSoc jurists are placed on the bench to fight culture wars, but they're also supposed to uphold the interests of the plutocracy, and there's nothing plutocrats hate more than uncertainty.

(Also, Big Pharma and the medical industry give a lot of money to Republicans, although they give slightly more to Democrats. The GOP wants that money to keep flowing.)

Republicans should be hoping the Court will toss the ruling out -- if it's still in force in November 2024, I don't believe it will lead to a Democratic landslide, but it's clearly doing some political damage to the GOP. Not only would a rejection of the Kacsmaryk ruling dampen Democratic turnout, it could also inspire Republicans to get out and vote -- the right-wing message would be that the federal courts are riddled with liberals, all the way up to the High Court, and the only solution is to vote GOP so some some real conservatives can be appointed.

And as I'm writing this, a story pops up:
Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., said Monday that the Food and Drug Administration should ignore a federal judge's ruling Friday that endangers a pill commonly used for abortion.

"This is an FDA-approved drug. Whether you agree with its usage or not, that's not your decision," Mace told CNN in an interview. "That is the FDA's decision on the efficacy, safety and usage of that particular drug."

Asked whether she believed the judge's ruling she be ignored, Mace said, "I agree with ignoring it at this point."

"This thing should just be thrown out, quite frankly,” she added.
Okay, now I find it plausible that the Supreme Court will reject the ruling. The GOP obviously wants Mace out there saying this.

So maybe the ruling will be overturned. However...


Oh, sure. These fights are never over.

Posted by Steve M. at 9:15 AM

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)