> That's a scenario that could have quite a large blast radius.
Which is precisely the intended effect.
"This is about state's rights to decide what they want", scream the Republicans, and immediately several state AGs sue the Federal Drug Administration to get rulings that will have effects in other states. Like didn't Texas also sue another state to invalidate that other state's election results?
There's barely any pretense, and what pretense there is is so shallow/hollow/transparent you wonder why they bother.
2 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 19.8 ms ] threadIf they rule against chemical abortions, will we see a situation similar to Kate Cox in Texas where the ruling is taken to the extreme?
In other words, would any drug that induced an abortion -- whether intended or not -- be affected by this case?
That's a scenario that could have quite a large blast radius.
Which is precisely the intended effect.
"This is about state's rights to decide what they want", scream the Republicans, and immediately several state AGs sue the Federal Drug Administration to get rulings that will have effects in other states. Like didn't Texas also sue another state to invalidate that other state's election results?
There's barely any pretense, and what pretense there is is so shallow/hollow/transparent you wonder why they bother.