Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in Mifepristone Case

The suit over abortion pill regulations seems likely to hinge on standing, not substance.

By and
373

Happy Thursday! With March Madness’ Sweet 16 round set to begin tonight, let’s check in on the TMD pool standings. 

There were more than 1,200 brackets entered into the pool, and here’s where things currently stand:

  1. B. Jones
  2. Alex D. (Dispatch fact checker)
  3. Kim W.
  4. Carla H. (mother-in-law of an unnamed person at The Dispatch)

     …

Β Β Β Β Β 10. Stephen H. (father of an unnamed person at The Dispatch)

This content is available exclusively to Dispatch members
Try a membership for full access to every newsletter and all of The Dispatch. Support quality, fact-based journalism.
Start Your Free Trial
Already a paid member? Sign In
373
By and
Comments (373)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    Julie from Texas

    Baseball!!!! Go, 'Stros!

    Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    SKREE-nak

    > Which sport’s opening day or kickoff to the season is your favorite?

    None. 'Nuff said about this tedious topic.

    Collapse
  3. Kathleen Sinclair

    LUK: As my 8 yo says, this answer is β€œeasy peasy Mac and squeezy.” Orioles Opening Day puts the whole city in a good mood - this year it was especially meaningful with the Key Bridge Tragedy (and it didn’t hurt to have a big win). Also mitigated the sadness of my beloved Tar Heels falling to Alabama.

    Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    Rosedragon55

    I would like to remind everyone about some details of epidemiology. According to the Guttmacher Institute (https://www.guttmacher.org/sites/default/files/factsheet/sfaa-ca.pdf) in 2017, California alone hosted 132,680 abortions. If 0.5% of those women experienced serious, hospitalizing side effects, that’s roughly 650 women. That is not an insignificant number.
    For context, a gene only has to reach 1% frequency to be labeled wild type (common, expected in a population). 1 in 200 is huge, at the population level.

    Collapse
    1. Incognito

      I believe the rate of serious complications for childbirth is ~ 3x higher than the medication abortion combo. And serious complications for procedural abortion are higher than medication abortion as well.

      So long as informed consent is conducted the ultimate choice for risk threshold should be between the doctor and pregnant woman. Millions of Americans don't blink an eye or even pay attention to risks associated with prescriptions or OTC medications on a daily basis.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Rosedragon55

        Maybe they should pay more attention. The Pill, the common oral contraceptive, literally lists death as a side effect on the box. It can give a woman a fatal blood clot.
        Also, we can make childbirth much safer in many ways; we just haven’t done so yet because our healthcare system is inadequate and our politics deranged. The risks of the abortion pill, as you mentioned, can’t be reduced much further (if we are even measuring them accurately).

        Collapse
  5. Bobbell73

    I wish you had asked your "Opening Day" question next Monday so I could answer WNBA.

    Collapse
  6. Incognito

    Why didn't Stephen H name their child? How does that child get credit for their work at The Dispatch? So many unanswered questions.

    Collapse
  7. Avatar photo
    Angie

    LUK: I have been to many Opening Days for the Indians, at my last job, one of the partners had a group that bought tickets in blocks, any not used in the group, he gave to us.
    My dad and I once went together, one of the fondest memories of my life...we didn't do much one-on-one things

    Baseball Opening Day is just different, the season changes, the excitement, all the teams etc

    As to the major sports generally, Football is my favorite

    Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    Show Jay Janney the πŸšͺ!

    A minor quibble about your comments on Danny Kahneman. He and Amos Tversky showed how biases cloud people's judgement, but not that people act irrationally. The body of their work is how people don't always process information accurately. the decisions they make are flawed, but people believe they have acted on accurate information. That's rational, not irrational.

    The problem with authors like Thomas Frank, who apply their lens to an issue and assume others should do the same. When they don't they assume they are irrational. They likely are not.

    Acting rational is voting for Joe Biden (despite his likely having dementia) because he's running against someone you hate, Donald Trump. Acting irrational is voting for Joe Biden because you oppose electing people suspected of having dementia. IOW, Jonah is likely rational (I've never met him, so I can't say for sure either way).

    BTW, Michael Lewis wrote a wonderful book about Kahneman and Tversky and their friendship. It's called "𝑻𝒉𝒆 π’–π’π’…π’π’Šπ’π’ˆ 𝒑𝒓𝒐𝒋𝒆𝒄𝒕" and I highly recommend it. Lewis flat out is a gifted writer.

    Collapse
  9. Cherylemac@gmail.com

    I am surprised that various news publications are running statements regarding Joe Lieberman such this one fro. The Dispatch : Lieberman was the first Jewish candidate on a major party’s presidential ticket.
    I grew up in the 50s & 60s and I believe Barry Goldwater holds that title.

    Collapse
    1. Morah Nechamah

      He was not a Jew.

      Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      Show Jay Janney the πŸšͺ!

      Goldwater's father can from a Jewish family, but his mother was Episcopalian. The press is not always consistent in how it describes people where the mother and father are from different identities (e.g. Barack Obama).

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        C C Writer

        The press just about missed the story of Lieberman's involvement with No Labels, which was current and significant. I think the AP was shamed into covering it, belatedly.

        Collapse
  10. Avatar photo
    ILikeSmartPeople

    It's absurd to ask a judge to re-evaluate the scientific evidence behind an FDA-approved drug. If malfeasance (e.g., bribery, fraud) can be shown to have tainted an FDA decision, fine. But in this case, where no malfeasance is alleged, I'm happy that SCOTUS appears to have chosen to stay in its lane.

    Collapse
Load More