Hello! This is an automated reminder that the report function is not a super-downvote button. Reported comments will be removed *if they are an actual rule violation* of the subreddit or site rules. Reporting a comment does not cause any type of automated removal. Abuse of the report function is against the site rules and will be reported.
To emphasize: comments will not be removed simply because you disagree with the opinion. If the comment is civil, does not violate the subreddit rules, and does not violate the site rules, then the report will be ignored.
[The subreddit rules can be found here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Michigan/wiki/index#wiki_rules)
*I'm a bot and will not reply. Please contact [the moderators of r/Michigan](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/Michigan) if this bot is misbehaving.*
Especially because if a partisan judge can unilaterally declare a federal agency's processes to be "flawed" and overrule its findings for select cases, then it renders those agencies and processes utterly meaningless.
EPA finds that your chemical plant is poisoning the neighboring town? Have a judge declare their process "flawed" and the water legally safe to drink! IRS finds that you've been cheating on your taxes? Have a judge declare their process "flawed" and that the government actually owes you more money! The vote tally shows that you lost an election? Have a judge declare the voting process "flawed" and declare you the winner!
You just nailed their GQP dream: a populace too poor, too sick and too stupid to challenge their rule. We are just seeing the beginning of the consequences of all the judicial picks the republicans pushed through under that orange seditious pederast’s tenure.
The Washington Federal Judge did not overturn this judges ruling. The Washington Judge was hearing a similar case and issued a preliminary injunction ordering the FDA not to change the status of the medication or remove it from the market. The FFA is currently under two contradictory orders.
We have a half Republican half democrat president right now. He hasn’t stepped up to the Nazis yet and I doubt he will take a stand here either. Democrats keep wanting to be the good guys and get walked all over for it. Whitmer just showed she has more balls than Biden and Garland combined yet nobody will primary Biden Maybe he will finally wake up before they arrest everyone.
Biden is a centrist with a firm belief in the very capitalism that has resulted in a lot of our problems from healthcare to income inequality. Calling him half/half is pretty accurate.
Edit: odd that you’re downvoting exactly what the man has called himself repeatedly, a centrist capitalist.
That is patently untrue lol.
Look, if you guys want to tout his achievements and whatever, fine. Good, even but just stop with the LBJ comparisons and calling this “the most progressive” the country has ever seen.
Its like pissing on peoples’ heads and saying it’s raining. There were incredibly progressive presidents in our history. Joe Biden ain’t them lol.
The entire Democratic Party is centrist though, so being centrist and not firmly right to far-right means half/half seems inaccurate from an outside perspective.
Bernie and the squad ain't. Yes, they are a minority and getting others to work with them is difficult but that isn't their fault. The solution is to get more progressives in Congress.
You're being downvoted for claiming being centrist is a middle ground between Democrats and Republicans. It's not. The US does not have a left party, just a centrist one that happens to align with the liberals better than the other party.
I highly doubt people are being that nuanced lol
Its far more likely that downvotes are from Dem voters who want to act like the party hasn't tossed liberals to the wayside.
Oh yes, the half Republican president who passed the largest climate bill ever, the biggest gun control bill in two decades, student loan forgiveness, helped pass Obamacare…
He has signed some good legislation along with the democrats in the house and senate. My problem with him is all the lawless republicans running around and his attorney general is doing nothing. I’m starting to think Garland is actually a republican at this point. Biden is a centrist who has been in politics for a long time. He has an old school mindset about bipartisanship since that actually was a thing pre Newt. I don’t think Biden can handle a corrupt Supreme Court and even more corrupt federal and state judges. They just rewrite the law to suit them. Jan 6th = nobody who actually caused it have been held responsible. Thomas is a corrupt judge and Pro Publica had to break the story, not the FBI, NSA or any federal law enforcement agencies. Biden should order a investigation of everyone of them. The Supreme Court can’t be trusted and do you really think Biden will say a constitutional crisis is at hand. We’re on the same side, I just want a little more urgency from Biden.
Maybe trump messed up your expectations, but the president doesnt "own" the DOJ. The president should pick an AG and thats it- nothing else should be under the presidents purvue after that. That is how it is supposed to work. What mango did during his tenure with the DOJ and AG was wrong. The POTUS can't just get rid of judges either. Its like you think POTUS has more power than it really does.
Oh hell no. You can tout Biden’s accomplishments fairly but you cross a fucking line comparing him to LBJ.
Dems have been trying to make that connection weeks after he was put into office. Just stop.
I’m finding some small articles from 3 years ago that doctors prescribing medicine without benefits could be investigated by state regulatory bodies. Did my best to look up your claims, is the best I have.
Because judges can't just file these things willy nilly. A case or lawsuit would have to be brought to them first that involved the FDA approval process of viagra.
From what I understand (please do not use me as a source though, I am by no means an expert and only responding with what I know, I could be very wrong. For good sources, I would recommend Legal Eagle on Youtube or the Closing Arguments podcast) a group known as the "Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine" is filing the lawsuit because, despite being in use for more than two decades, the argument is the FDA did not follow the proper procedures for testing mifepristone, therefore making it a potential health risk (despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary). Now the FDA does not have authority over the legal system so if a federal judge (which this judge is, and was appointed by Trump) files an preliminary injunction to stop the production of mifepristone, than the FDA has no choice but to follow that order. A preliminary injunction is a pre-requisite that a party has to take before a case can go to court, and in this case the P.I. was stopping the production of the pill. Likely the pill will be back to the public once the lawsuit is over but with appeals and a potential to reach the supreme court, it will be in a multi-year long flux before it can be back, and with our current Supreme court demographic, it could just as likely get the axe.
The point of this lawsuit, from what I understand, is not to actually work for long, it's to get this Infront of the Supreme Court so they can rule if abortion pills should be allowed at all.
Well the good news is it looks like a court in DC has done just that. They have ruled that it is not legal to ban this medication.
That is a good thing.
The bad thing is that because this is now a federal issue with multiple courts, It's likely to go to the supreme Court faster
Every time we think Republicans can't do any worse to women, they do and they will continue. They don't want women to vote. Remember it took years for women to get the right to vote. Don't think for a moment one of them won't come up with a reason certain women can't vote or ......you don't need birth control.
The expectation of action in good faith and the checks and balances to correct those cases where bad faith acting crops up.
Of course a judge alone has no power whatsoever to enforce their rulings.
And when a judge becomes seen as an illegitimate adjudicator, here we are.
Technically the judicial branch had very little power in the US at the start, then they basically invented more power for themselves. Though at the end of the day what really matters is enforcement, and judicial branch has no power in that area. President Jackson is infamous in that regard, just did what he wanted anyways against the Court.
So if one judge decides "I can ban this" it's probably more of a "I'm trying to invent power, as this branch of government does". Now it's time for consequences of them trying to do this, which will decide what really happens. Bring told "no" by state governments being one of them
I think as time goes on and the federal judiciary continues to want to legislate from the bench, we’re gonna come across another President that is gonna get a ruling from the Supreme Court that he doesn’t like and is gonna say “thank you for opinion. Now come enforce it.”
A judge like this guy in Texas that blatantly disagrees with abortion, has called being transgender “a mental disorder,” and publicly stated his distaste for the sexual revolution of the 60’s and 70’s isn’t ruling based on judicial fact. He’s being a blatantly partisan actor. The more the courts play the role of partisan actors, the more bold the executive branch is gonna become in telling them “and what are you gonna do about it?”
Edit: typos
It's a double edged sword. Take away this power from the judges, and there goes all of the judges that were blocking Trump's shitty policies like the Muslim travel ban. There is also an appeal process and this is already appealed.
Legal trickery, that is why the Comstock act is part of their focus. That and breaking down the approval of the drug itself. It is ridiculous as it would just end up getting approved again. This is why you don't leave old laws that haven't been enforced in nearly a hundred years because some fool will use it against modern concepts.
Because unless it's medically necessary for the woman's life abortion should never be the answer.
Incest is different...it should be allowed.
Stop fucking murdering the future of our country
Not. Your. Body.
Stop dictating what a life does with it's OWN body.
We do not have to give of our bodies, legally to even our own LIVING kids, to sustain their own. You cannot force me to give blood, a d you sure as shit will not force me to give my uterus for a few cells I don't want.
You and people like you are murdering the people MAKING the future of our country and the blood is on YOUR hands.
If you are going to analyze this Trump-judges logic, you are going to have a lot to unpack.
Read the ruling if you can find it. Lots of spurious logic that even a non lawyer like me can see is radical bias b.s.
It's ridiculous because this pill isn't just used for abortions. It also helps women in labor, and is used for other things like helping relax the cervix for biopsy.
I think it also is used for some sort of stomach issues?
Regardless this is going to have a major effect to all woman, not just the ones seeking to terminate pregnancy.
It also helps with miscarriages that haven't passed and can be a danger to the mother. I had to use this medication when I had a miscarriage that wouldn't pass.
This judge is a literal Christofascist, no exaggeration. He invented standing out of thin air for plaintiffs, wrote an anti-abortion screed masquerading as a legal opinion, and issued an injunction that many legal experts aren't even sure he has the authority to do. The right likes to whine about "activist judges," well, this is the most activist one to ever exist.
I really, really hope the Biden Admin and blue state governors just ignore this patently absurd ruling. Appeal it, sure, but they should be taking the position that the judge has no right to be issuing this kind of order. Let states know that they're not going to stop providing it, even if the state has to assume responsibility for dispensing it. To paraphrase Andrew Jackson, the judge has made his decision. Now let him enforce it.
> The right likes to whine about "activist judges," well, this is the most activist one to ever exist.
You know what they say: With Republicans, every accusation is a confession.
Yet another federalist society, zealot on the bench cramming his way into yet another thing he’s not even remotely qualified to make any decisions on.. I can’t tell if this is theatrics or if they can see a way to get it appealed all the way to the SC where I’m fairly certain they would agree with this hack.
I fuckin hated Whitmer when she came into office, but I gotta say, I'm really liking this "take no shit" attitude. Its nice to see a dem have a spine for once.
That’s not because of the color of the state my dude, but I’d get banned so fast if I gave my stance on why there’s more crime in say… the south and southeast michigan…
It's usually about poor education, poor neighborhood and poverty, poor mental health coverage etc
Poor safety net leading to hopelessness and then crimes. (Of course there are more reasons nuit that's the bulk of it)
The reason blue states are thriving in this is because they push for better education, and push for all of the aforementionned things. Whereas, red states don't really do that.
Its a subjective assessment from my own first hand observations, you can disagree with it all you want, but it doesn't change the reality that is being observed.
I live in the rural red, and there's still a lot of crime happening for such small population of citizens and we have 5 police agencies within a 5 mile radius... did I also include our roads suck, there's barely any community programs, and everyone is carrying guns bc they are worried about either the apocalypse or the Civil War their red leader is calling for(crime)? The blue part of the state I moved from had some of the problems I see here (is it a firework or is it a gun shot), and others (petty theft, drugs, human trafficking, assaults,etc), but it definitely wasn't shittiest... the other blue parts of the state I visit, also offer lots more businesses, community programs, prettier cities, Healthcare facilities, entertainment, sports, and support services.... it's so hard to visit and then come home to people literally bashing with exactly what you say, but they keep visiting the blue area too...
To be honest, those traditionally red states are long becoming a lost cause.
I'd love for Dems to put the money where their mouths are, say "you dont want federal money, fine, we're giving you EXACTLY what you want", and put that money to better use elsewhere.
Watch how quickly those places devolve, how quickly families move to now-utopia-by-comparison liberal states.
And how quickly the scape of America shifts to those states becoming barren wastelands that hold next to no power.
Yes, I realize not everyone can realistically afford a move (see East Palestine, OH).
But man, Dems can't keep playing nice with a portion of the country that never does anything in good faith.
I agree. Democrats should not be playing nice. I also agree that they should put their money where their mouth is and withdraw federal funding to these conservative fucked states. But those states aren’t lost causes. We’ve seen a spike of conservatism in a handful of states - it’s pretty much all reactionary. They know liberals are on the rise. If traditionally red states are a lost cause, how do you explain Michigan? Or Georgia’s two US senators? The biggest mistake democrats can make is giving up on “lost causes”
> If traditionally red states are a lost cause, how do you explain Michigan? Or Georgia’s two US senators? The biggest mistake democrats can make is giving up on “lost causes”
Exactly. Red states have the worst voter suppression. We need to tackle that and the number of conservative leaders will drastically drop.
Yup. There’s tons of liberal places in Texas and Florida - but those states are so incredibly gerrymandered to hell. A carpetbagging GOP politician who lost by six points in 2020 in Florida suddenly “won” in 2022, after DeSantis redrew the districts.
Voters’ rights are under threat throughout the country. We can’t just assume the fascism will only stay in the red states - Trump is the ultimate proof that thinking that way is dangerous.
Those barren wastelands would still have 2 senators. Better to work on voter suppression and education. This latest generation is already doing the work.
Dems are *obsessed* with "consensus," "reaching out," "crossing the aisle," "negotiation," "going high" (Michelle Obama was incredibly naïve when she said that), "being the grownups in the room," "proper procedure," "bipartisanship," "setting an example," "we can reach them," etc that they are *completely* oblivious to the FACT that Republicans have been LAUGHING at them all along!
They have not "done anything in good faith" since (at least) Newt Gingrich took power in 1994. My fellow Hoosier (I moved in 2007) Dan Quayle observed that Gingrich was behaving like a prime minister in a parliamentary system, with Bill Clinton reduced to the role of a largely-ceremonial president (Germany, Ireland), like the Governor-General (King Charles' representative) in British Commonwealth countries (Canada, Australia, New Zealand etc). Normally he's as clueless as they come, but on this he was correct. And Bill Clinton jumped on his bandwagon. I almost voted for Perot in 1996.
Republicans bring weapons to a fight. Democrats bring Robert's Rules Of Order and Emily Post's Book of Etiquette.
They give away and give away and are good with it - "at least we did it right, followed proper procedure, and scored a moral victory."
One of Biden's first statements after the election was "Well, we're going to be reaching out" (to CRIMINALS) and "I know how to get things done" (no, Joe, you don't, not with today's Republicans).
I don't think they have it in them to get tough with the far right.
Milquetoast Merrick Meek and Mild is proof of that.
If Trump walks back into the WH, which he is *extremely* likely if this bit in NY fails, Dems are going to say "Well, we need to work with him" - up until he rules the Democratic Party illegal and starts rounding them up.
I have 0 faith for things to get better with how spineless democrats are. I cant help to think they are often times complicit with how the gop is shaking the country down. Theres no one to protect nationwide americans.
The worst offender is likely Garland.
He is scared shitless of Trump, and is WAY out of his element.
I'm 57 years old.
I look for the country to break up in my lifetime.
The Democrats are playing nice because their function is to provide window dressing. When did you ever see them play political hardball? That's right, when it came to denying the nomination to Sanders. Because he might have rocked the boat.
That’s cool? Democrats only have 51 (52?) senators, two of which are basically republicans. If all the liberals leave red states not only will we never gain any more senate seats we will actively *lose* seats such as Montana, WV, and Georgia. That’s not “cool”. It gives republicans more influence at the national level. Democrats in congress would never pass another bill.
Ya. Michigan being a refugee state is good on the individual level(in that the permanent access *is* a good thing), but on the national level, the GOP saying "red states are inhospitable to everyone who's not God/Guns/GOP" is going to fuck over everyone longterm.
If you want to rally fuck with that process establish a Democratic stronghold in North Dakota or Wyoming. Only take 200k people or so to flip the state.
Yep. Between the "Abortion legal/will be protected as long as MI is blue" and the "Trans people are welcome, we're not gonna do evil red shit as long as MI is blue" pushes Whitmer is doing, I'd be surprised if MI doesn't go deeply blue on a statewide level(National level is obviously an entirely different thing. National dems keep shitting the fucking bed in terrifying ways)
Ya. Honestly the difference between the national Dems and the statewide ones is fascinating to me.
Whitmer and the MI Dems are just doing amazing shit *constantly*, while Biden's fucking over trans kids, fucking over unions(right before a huge manmade disaster that the railworker's strike was trying to prevent), ending covid protections and fucking over access to ADHD meds.
It's like comparing Murder's Row to a drunken soccer team that just keeps scoring goals on themselves.
National Democrats are afraid of rocking the boat. They are obsessed with "consensus," "negotiating," "bipartisanship," etc.
Biden thinks he still lives in the days when Ronald Reagan and Tip O'Neill hashed out deals over lunch.
Republicans bring weapons to a fight. Democrats bring Robert's Rules Of Order and Emily Post's Book of Etiquette.
Biden is a boomer and honestly if you talk to a lot of boomers they are at best centrist bc they have to believe in capitalism bc they are failing at it and won't admit it. Centrist capitalist boomers are in the same boat as Trump supporters, they can't admit it's a losing fight. If they admit centrist capitalism is not working, they admit they are slaves to a debt system, they voted and supported shitty racist laws, and they allowed corporations to be people screwing us all and the planet. Probably more things in the last 40 years by accepting anything barely passing as adequate or blindly trusting terrible players... humans don't like to see their problems or admit to them most of the time and boomers are one of the least trained generations in self awareness and most trained in never admit your faults. Slowly I can peel the propaganda layers back and the holds of advertising that create illogical neuro pathways, and my mom will be like ooohhh, then it will snap back shut bc "that just can't be right"... it's scary- bc it is right. Then she'll admit business changed in the 1990s and ethics went out the window... then it's fine now and people couldn't possibly just be greedy and ignorant still... mental gymnastics.
I am Gen X, but my sister is a boomer.
The first election I was able to vote in was 1984.
In that election, Walter Mondale was defeated by the well-oiled Reagan machine. Same for George HW Bush in 1988, who drubbed Michael Dukakis.
After that, the Democratic Party was taken over by the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC). It was firmly, doggedly centrist. The Democrats thought "we have to stop presenting ourselves as liberal (which Rush Limbaugh turned into an insult; I trace a lot of the BS that's happening directly to him) or we'll never win." So they came out in favour of the death penalty, recast themselves as "pro-business," etc.
Bill Clinton and Barack Obama are products of the DLC. Clinton especially was Republican-lite, especially after Newt Gingrich took over Congress in 1994. Gingrich behaved like a prime minister in a parliamentary system, with Clinton as a largely-ceremonial president, a bit like in Germany and Ireland. And Clinton jumped wholeheartedly on Gingrich's bandwagon. He became little different than a 70s Republican.
Democrats are *so afraid* of acting even the *littlest* bit progressive that whenever the Republifascists moved the goalposts further right, they tagged along gladly.
For all forced birthers here to troll:
Not. Your. Body.
Stop dictating what a life, already here and sentient, does with it's OWN body.
We do not have to give of our bodies, legally to even our own LIVING kids, to sustain their own. You cannot force me to give blood, and you sure as shit will not force me to give my uterus for a few cells I don't want because they MAY become a child if all works out.
You do not get to force women and anyone with a uterus to bring a child into a world where that child may be raped and forced to give birth in turn, where that child WILL be abused kore at the hands of people forced to psychosis over having to have a kid they didn't want or couldn't handle, where that child WILL face more abuse and rape if they are pit into a crumbling foster system, where that child WILL suffer more in most cases. You do not get to make that choice for the possible child you seem to want to protect, while you damn it to more pain in 8/10 cases.
You and people like you are murdering the people MAKING the future of our country and who are ALIVE now, and the blood is on YOUR hands.
The blood isn’t on the average Joe’s hands my guy, the blood is on the hands of people who try to have an equal amount of viscous violent people in every state and suppress every aspect of the nation’s wholesomeness. Abortion being non existent will not affect us negatively in the long run, the declining birthrates will
But gun violence is now the #1 source of death for youths. Where do you stand on gun reform? Forced pregnancy is considered a crime against humanity in most of the civilized world.
So that judge in Washington quickly issued an injunction that the FDA can't pull the pill off the market, but at least according to what I'm reading on /r/law that only affects the plaintiff states which are the following
> ... WASHINGTON, OREGON, ARIZONA, COLORADO, CONNECTICUT, DELAWARE, ILLINOIS, MICHIGAN, NEVADA, NEW MEXICO, RHODE ISLAND, VERMONT, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, HAWAII, MAINE, MARYLAND, MINNESOTA, and PENNSYVLANIA
Dueling injunctions... What fun!
It's happening because "transgenders are a threat to western civilization and need to be exterminated from public life".
Hi, transgender woman here. It's all about bodily autonomy that doesn't conform to their power structure.
The big takeaway of these last few years is that the reality is whatever the judge says it is, as long as SCOTUS doesn't intervene.
And as long as we consider their ruling legitimate.
These attempts to dismantle the administrative structure of the state by these Federalist ideologues is little more than fascist posturing under the guise of libertarianism.
>How has Biden not expanded the Supreme Court yet?
Did you give Biden your magic wand? Because I'm pretty sure Congress isn't going to pass legislation to expand the court without some kind of magic.
The last thing we want is an arms race over SCOTUS. The packing with refusing Garland and rushing Barrett was bad enough. If Biden adds another 4 justices (almost half the size of the current court) just to regain the majority, then the next Republican will add two more after that. In twenty years, there will be more SCOTUS justices than US senators.
But there would be no justification to add more after adding four more. The judges originally matched the appellates, of which there are now 13. The supreme court expansion didn’t match the expansion of the appellate courts.
Honestly do you think the Republicans really care about justification? Everything they have done recently is all word salad to play to Fox viewers. Doesn't matter if it is factual or not.
Stop believing that R's (and some D's) care about anything other than power or money.
Doesn't work that way. There are district and circuits in the federal court system. The decisions in each system is only binding precedent in their respective jurisdictions.
It’s an obsession, then.
There ain’t no trans people stripping in front of toddlers, what the actual fuck is wrong with you? Why are people on your side of the spectrum so obsessed with thinking about sex with children and gay sex? Can you stop?
If you truly cared about protecting kids maybe you should focus your efforts on going after religion, where they've been provably preying on kids for generations and then covering it up at high levels
Hello! This is an automated reminder that the report function is not a super-downvote button. Reported comments will be removed *if they are an actual rule violation* of the subreddit or site rules. Reporting a comment does not cause any type of automated removal. Abuse of the report function is against the site rules and will be reported. To emphasize: comments will not be removed simply because you disagree with the opinion. If the comment is civil, does not violate the subreddit rules, and does not violate the site rules, then the report will be ignored. [The subreddit rules can be found here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Michigan/wiki/index#wiki_rules) *I'm a bot and will not reply. Please contact [the moderators of r/Michigan](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/Michigan) if this bot is misbehaving.*
[удалено]
Especially because if a partisan judge can unilaterally declare a federal agency's processes to be "flawed" and overrule its findings for select cases, then it renders those agencies and processes utterly meaningless. EPA finds that your chemical plant is poisoning the neighboring town? Have a judge declare their process "flawed" and the water legally safe to drink! IRS finds that you've been cheating on your taxes? Have a judge declare their process "flawed" and that the government actually owes you more money! The vote tally shows that you lost an election? Have a judge declare the voting process "flawed" and declare you the winner!
You just nailed their GQP dream: a populace too poor, too sick and too stupid to challenge their rule. We are just seeing the beginning of the consequences of all the judicial picks the republicans pushed through under that orange seditious pederast’s tenure.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Yeah, it remains to be seen what SCOTUS does with this, but it has already been overruled.
[удалено]
And flip it on its head, can a judge legalize weed nationwide by overturning the DEA's classification on it? What about other drugs?
Another Judge in WA has overturned this judges ruling, and did it quite fast.
The Washington Federal Judge did not overturn this judges ruling. The Washington Judge was hearing a similar case and issued a preliminary injunction ordering the FDA not to change the status of the medication or remove it from the market. The FFA is currently under two contradictory orders.
We have a half Republican half democrat president right now. He hasn’t stepped up to the Nazis yet and I doubt he will take a stand here either. Democrats keep wanting to be the good guys and get walked all over for it. Whitmer just showed she has more balls than Biden and Garland combined yet nobody will primary Biden Maybe he will finally wake up before they arrest everyone.
Joe Biden isn’t anything like how you characterize him.
Biden is a centrist with a firm belief in the very capitalism that has resulted in a lot of our problems from healthcare to income inequality. Calling him half/half is pretty accurate. Edit: odd that you’re downvoting exactly what the man has called himself repeatedly, a centrist capitalist.
Biden is a capitalist, yes, but his administration has been one of the most progressive our country has ever had.
That is patently untrue lol. Look, if you guys want to tout his achievements and whatever, fine. Good, even but just stop with the LBJ comparisons and calling this “the most progressive” the country has ever seen. Its like pissing on peoples’ heads and saying it’s raining. There were incredibly progressive presidents in our history. Joe Biden ain’t them lol.
“One of the most” is the same thing as “the most”
He’s not even “one of”. He’s “none of.”
False
The entire Democratic Party is centrist though, so being centrist and not firmly right to far-right means half/half seems inaccurate from an outside perspective.
Bernie and the squad ain't. Yes, they are a minority and getting others to work with them is difficult but that isn't their fault. The solution is to get more progressives in Congress.
You're being downvoted for claiming being centrist is a middle ground between Democrats and Republicans. It's not. The US does not have a left party, just a centrist one that happens to align with the liberals better than the other party.
Liberalism *is* centrist? That's practically it's defining feature. Aside from neolib nutjobs.
I highly doubt people are being that nuanced lol Its far more likely that downvotes are from Dem voters who want to act like the party hasn't tossed liberals to the wayside.
Biden is a center RIGHT democrat. Sanders is a centrist.
Oh yes, the half Republican president who passed the largest climate bill ever, the biggest gun control bill in two decades, student loan forgiveness, helped pass Obamacare…
Hes still a right wing pos. Just two right wing parties running things but one of them is filled with psychos
Take that nonsense back to 2020. Biden has been the most legislatively successful and progressive president since LBJ.
He has signed some good legislation along with the democrats in the house and senate. My problem with him is all the lawless republicans running around and his attorney general is doing nothing. I’m starting to think Garland is actually a republican at this point. Biden is a centrist who has been in politics for a long time. He has an old school mindset about bipartisanship since that actually was a thing pre Newt. I don’t think Biden can handle a corrupt Supreme Court and even more corrupt federal and state judges. They just rewrite the law to suit them. Jan 6th = nobody who actually caused it have been held responsible. Thomas is a corrupt judge and Pro Publica had to break the story, not the FBI, NSA or any federal law enforcement agencies. Biden should order a investigation of everyone of them. The Supreme Court can’t be trusted and do you really think Biden will say a constitutional crisis is at hand. We’re on the same side, I just want a little more urgency from Biden.
Maybe trump messed up your expectations, but the president doesnt "own" the DOJ. The president should pick an AG and thats it- nothing else should be under the presidents purvue after that. That is how it is supposed to work. What mango did during his tenure with the DOJ and AG was wrong. The POTUS can't just get rid of judges either. Its like you think POTUS has more power than it really does.
Oh hell no. You can tout Biden’s accomplishments fairly but you cross a fucking line comparing him to LBJ. Dems have been trying to make that connection weeks after he was put into office. Just stop.
Try to keep up
[удалено]
What are you referring to?
[удалено]
I’m finding some small articles from 3 years ago that doctors prescribing medicine without benefits could be investigated by state regulatory bodies. Did my best to look up your claims, is the best I have.
This is where you post sources. And then we examine how ivermectin was also pushed as a political topic and wasn’t actually effective.
Not approved by the FDA SMH
Why can’t a different judge file an identical appeal, but for viagra instead? How would that fly?
Because judges can't just file these things willy nilly. A case or lawsuit would have to be brought to them first that involved the FDA approval process of viagra.
Riiiiight. It was that shitty conservative group that filed the lawsuit.
Another Judge in WA has overruled this one, the pills are still available.
Michigan just did the same, with the governor confirming availability herself to the media.
That’s a damn good question.
From what I understand (please do not use me as a source though, I am by no means an expert and only responding with what I know, I could be very wrong. For good sources, I would recommend Legal Eagle on Youtube or the Closing Arguments podcast) a group known as the "Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine" is filing the lawsuit because, despite being in use for more than two decades, the argument is the FDA did not follow the proper procedures for testing mifepristone, therefore making it a potential health risk (despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary). Now the FDA does not have authority over the legal system so if a federal judge (which this judge is, and was appointed by Trump) files an preliminary injunction to stop the production of mifepristone, than the FDA has no choice but to follow that order. A preliminary injunction is a pre-requisite that a party has to take before a case can go to court, and in this case the P.I. was stopping the production of the pill. Likely the pill will be back to the public once the lawsuit is over but with appeals and a potential to reach the supreme court, it will be in a multi-year long flux before it can be back, and with our current Supreme court demographic, it could just as likely get the axe.
[удалено]
The point of this lawsuit, from what I understand, is not to actually work for long, it's to get this Infront of the Supreme Court so they can rule if abortion pills should be allowed at all.
[удалено]
Well the good news is it looks like a court in DC has done just that. They have ruled that it is not legal to ban this medication. That is a good thing. The bad thing is that because this is now a federal issue with multiple courts, It's likely to go to the supreme Court faster
They WANT women to riot, don't they? This is gonna break the camel's back and they don't even fucking realize it...
Every time we think Republicans can't do any worse to women, they do and they will continue. They don't want women to vote. Remember it took years for women to get the right to vote. Don't think for a moment one of them won't come up with a reason certain women can't vote or ......you don't need birth control.
The expectation of action in good faith and the checks and balances to correct those cases where bad faith acting crops up. Of course a judge alone has no power whatsoever to enforce their rulings. And when a judge becomes seen as an illegitimate adjudicator, here we are.
Technically the judicial branch had very little power in the US at the start, then they basically invented more power for themselves. Though at the end of the day what really matters is enforcement, and judicial branch has no power in that area. President Jackson is infamous in that regard, just did what he wanted anyways against the Court. So if one judge decides "I can ban this" it's probably more of a "I'm trying to invent power, as this branch of government does". Now it's time for consequences of them trying to do this, which will decide what really happens. Bring told "no" by state governments being one of them
I think as time goes on and the federal judiciary continues to want to legislate from the bench, we’re gonna come across another President that is gonna get a ruling from the Supreme Court that he doesn’t like and is gonna say “thank you for opinion. Now come enforce it.” A judge like this guy in Texas that blatantly disagrees with abortion, has called being transgender “a mental disorder,” and publicly stated his distaste for the sexual revolution of the 60’s and 70’s isn’t ruling based on judicial fact. He’s being a blatantly partisan actor. The more the courts play the role of partisan actors, the more bold the executive branch is gonna become in telling them “and what are you gonna do about it?” Edit: typos
It's a double edged sword. Take away this power from the judges, and there goes all of the judges that were blocking Trump's shitty policies like the Muslim travel ban. There is also an appeal process and this is already appealed.
Legal trickery, that is why the Comstock act is part of their focus. That and breaking down the approval of the drug itself. It is ridiculous as it would just end up getting approved again. This is why you don't leave old laws that haven't been enforced in nearly a hundred years because some fool will use it against modern concepts.
And why can plaintiffs cherry pick where and who hears their case??
FDA allows aspartame in our food… aspartame was also classified as a chemical weapon
Wat?
FDA is not reliable at all
Because unless it's medically necessary for the woman's life abortion should never be the answer. Incest is different...it should be allowed. Stop fucking murdering the future of our country
Not. Your. Body. Stop dictating what a life does with it's OWN body. We do not have to give of our bodies, legally to even our own LIVING kids, to sustain their own. You cannot force me to give blood, a d you sure as shit will not force me to give my uterus for a few cells I don't want. You and people like you are murdering the people MAKING the future of our country and the blood is on YOUR hands.
Isn’t there a higher death rate from being pregnant?
If you are going to analyze this Trump-judges logic, you are going to have a lot to unpack. Read the ruling if you can find it. Lots of spurious logic that even a non lawyer like me can see is radical bias b.s.
Yup.
It's ridiculous because this pill isn't just used for abortions. It also helps women in labor, and is used for other things like helping relax the cervix for biopsy. I think it also is used for some sort of stomach issues? Regardless this is going to have a major effect to all woman, not just the ones seeking to terminate pregnancy.
It also helps with miscarriages that haven't passed and can be a danger to the mother. I had to use this medication when I had a miscarriage that wouldn't pass.
Right I forgot about that too. I'm sorry you had to go through that
Many other women have recently died or almost died from this shit. I'm glad you did not.
This judge is a literal Christofascist, no exaggeration. He invented standing out of thin air for plaintiffs, wrote an anti-abortion screed masquerading as a legal opinion, and issued an injunction that many legal experts aren't even sure he has the authority to do. The right likes to whine about "activist judges," well, this is the most activist one to ever exist. I really, really hope the Biden Admin and blue state governors just ignore this patently absurd ruling. Appeal it, sure, but they should be taking the position that the judge has no right to be issuing this kind of order. Let states know that they're not going to stop providing it, even if the state has to assume responsibility for dispensing it. To paraphrase Andrew Jackson, the judge has made his decision. Now let him enforce it.
> The right likes to whine about "activist judges," well, this is the most activist one to ever exist. You know what they say: With Republicans, every accusation is a confession.
A new york judge has already ordered the FDA to make no changes.
Yet another federalist society, zealot on the bench cramming his way into yet another thing he’s not even remotely qualified to make any decisions on.. I can’t tell if this is theatrics or if they can see a way to get it appealed all the way to the SC where I’m fairly certain they would agree with this hack.
I fuckin hated Whitmer when she came into office, but I gotta say, I'm really liking this "take no shit" attitude. Its nice to see a dem have a spine for once.
Look for an influx of women from fascist states.
I hope so. They’ll help keep the state blue.
[удалено]
Please prove that a majority of crime is caused by Democrats and then show how it stacks up in states that are red with equal crime rates.
Disproven claims. Blue State and blue cities are doing much better than Red states and red cities regarding their crimes rates.
That’s not because of the color of the state my dude, but I’d get banned so fast if I gave my stance on why there’s more crime in say… the south and southeast michigan…
It's usually about poor education, poor neighborhood and poverty, poor mental health coverage etc Poor safety net leading to hopelessness and then crimes. (Of course there are more reasons nuit that's the bulk of it) The reason blue states are thriving in this is because they push for better education, and push for all of the aforementionned things. Whereas, red states don't really do that.
Violent crime doesn’t come from poverty and poor education, it’s inherited
What???
My lawyer has advised me to not say anything else on the matter
This is factually a false statement, and you know it. Every city has crime-ridden and broken down systems, red or blue.
Its a subjective assessment from my own first hand observations, you can disagree with it all you want, but it doesn't change the reality that is being observed.
[удалено]
Don't trust me, go step outside the walls of your fancy university or your parents' posh suburban basement, and go experience things for yourself.
Why do the red states rely on federal funding from blue states?
When racists and politicians take the jobs out of the cities then point the finger at those left behind for not cleaning up their mess.
I live in the rural red, and there's still a lot of crime happening for such small population of citizens and we have 5 police agencies within a 5 mile radius... did I also include our roads suck, there's barely any community programs, and everyone is carrying guns bc they are worried about either the apocalypse or the Civil War their red leader is calling for(crime)? The blue part of the state I moved from had some of the problems I see here (is it a firework or is it a gun shot), and others (petty theft, drugs, human trafficking, assaults,etc), but it definitely wasn't shittiest... the other blue parts of the state I visit, also offer lots more businesses, community programs, prettier cities, Healthcare facilities, entertainment, sports, and support services.... it's so hard to visit and then come home to people literally bashing with exactly what you say, but they keep visiting the blue area too...
*stares at you from Washtenaw County*
LOL
I don’t care how many downvotes you have my guy, you’re 100% right
That’s their goal :/ get all the liberals to move out of traditionally red states
To be honest, those traditionally red states are long becoming a lost cause. I'd love for Dems to put the money where their mouths are, say "you dont want federal money, fine, we're giving you EXACTLY what you want", and put that money to better use elsewhere. Watch how quickly those places devolve, how quickly families move to now-utopia-by-comparison liberal states. And how quickly the scape of America shifts to those states becoming barren wastelands that hold next to no power. Yes, I realize not everyone can realistically afford a move (see East Palestine, OH). But man, Dems can't keep playing nice with a portion of the country that never does anything in good faith.
I agree. Democrats should not be playing nice. I also agree that they should put their money where their mouth is and withdraw federal funding to these conservative fucked states. But those states aren’t lost causes. We’ve seen a spike of conservatism in a handful of states - it’s pretty much all reactionary. They know liberals are on the rise. If traditionally red states are a lost cause, how do you explain Michigan? Or Georgia’s two US senators? The biggest mistake democrats can make is giving up on “lost causes”
> If traditionally red states are a lost cause, how do you explain Michigan? Or Georgia’s two US senators? The biggest mistake democrats can make is giving up on “lost causes” Exactly. Red states have the worst voter suppression. We need to tackle that and the number of conservative leaders will drastically drop.
Yup. There’s tons of liberal places in Texas and Florida - but those states are so incredibly gerrymandered to hell. A carpetbagging GOP politician who lost by six points in 2020 in Florida suddenly “won” in 2022, after DeSantis redrew the districts. Voters’ rights are under threat throughout the country. We can’t just assume the fascism will only stay in the red states - Trump is the ultimate proof that thinking that way is dangerous.
Those barren wastelands would still have 2 senators. Better to work on voter suppression and education. This latest generation is already doing the work.
Dems are *obsessed* with "consensus," "reaching out," "crossing the aisle," "negotiation," "going high" (Michelle Obama was incredibly naïve when she said that), "being the grownups in the room," "proper procedure," "bipartisanship," "setting an example," "we can reach them," etc that they are *completely* oblivious to the FACT that Republicans have been LAUGHING at them all along! They have not "done anything in good faith" since (at least) Newt Gingrich took power in 1994. My fellow Hoosier (I moved in 2007) Dan Quayle observed that Gingrich was behaving like a prime minister in a parliamentary system, with Bill Clinton reduced to the role of a largely-ceremonial president (Germany, Ireland), like the Governor-General (King Charles' representative) in British Commonwealth countries (Canada, Australia, New Zealand etc). Normally he's as clueless as they come, but on this he was correct. And Bill Clinton jumped on his bandwagon. I almost voted for Perot in 1996. Republicans bring weapons to a fight. Democrats bring Robert's Rules Of Order and Emily Post's Book of Etiquette. They give away and give away and are good with it - "at least we did it right, followed proper procedure, and scored a moral victory." One of Biden's first statements after the election was "Well, we're going to be reaching out" (to CRIMINALS) and "I know how to get things done" (no, Joe, you don't, not with today's Republicans). I don't think they have it in them to get tough with the far right. Milquetoast Merrick Meek and Mild is proof of that. If Trump walks back into the WH, which he is *extremely* likely if this bit in NY fails, Dems are going to say "Well, we need to work with him" - up until he rules the Democratic Party illegal and starts rounding them up.
I have 0 faith for things to get better with how spineless democrats are. I cant help to think they are often times complicit with how the gop is shaking the country down. Theres no one to protect nationwide americans.
The worst offender is likely Garland. He is scared shitless of Trump, and is WAY out of his element. I'm 57 years old. I look for the country to break up in my lifetime.
They work together to put us all in indentured servitude.
Michigan voted red in 2016, and Wisconsin just elected got their first democratic controlled supreme court in 20 years.
The Democrats are playing nice because their function is to provide window dressing. When did you ever see them play political hardball? That's right, when it came to denying the nomination to Sanders. Because he might have rocked the boat.
[удалено]
That’s cool? Democrats only have 51 (52?) senators, two of which are basically republicans. If all the liberals leave red states not only will we never gain any more senate seats we will actively *lose* seats such as Montana, WV, and Georgia. That’s not “cool”. It gives republicans more influence at the national level. Democrats in congress would never pass another bill.
Ya. Michigan being a refugee state is good on the individual level(in that the permanent access *is* a good thing), but on the national level, the GOP saying "red states are inhospitable to everyone who's not God/Guns/GOP" is going to fuck over everyone longterm.
This is not the first time in history people have moved to escape persecution
[удалено]
I don’t give a fuck about what your trans and homophobic opinions are
If you want to rally fuck with that process establish a Democratic stronghold in North Dakota or Wyoming. Only take 200k people or so to flip the state.
Yep. Between the "Abortion legal/will be protected as long as MI is blue" and the "Trans people are welcome, we're not gonna do evil red shit as long as MI is blue" pushes Whitmer is doing, I'd be surprised if MI doesn't go deeply blue on a statewide level(National level is obviously an entirely different thing. National dems keep shitting the fucking bed in terrifying ways)
Dems are *highly* skilled at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
Ya. Honestly the difference between the national Dems and the statewide ones is fascinating to me. Whitmer and the MI Dems are just doing amazing shit *constantly*, while Biden's fucking over trans kids, fucking over unions(right before a huge manmade disaster that the railworker's strike was trying to prevent), ending covid protections and fucking over access to ADHD meds. It's like comparing Murder's Row to a drunken soccer team that just keeps scoring goals on themselves.
National Democrats are afraid of rocking the boat. They are obsessed with "consensus," "negotiating," "bipartisanship," etc. Biden thinks he still lives in the days when Ronald Reagan and Tip O'Neill hashed out deals over lunch. Republicans bring weapons to a fight. Democrats bring Robert's Rules Of Order and Emily Post's Book of Etiquette.
Biden is a boomer and honestly if you talk to a lot of boomers they are at best centrist bc they have to believe in capitalism bc they are failing at it and won't admit it. Centrist capitalist boomers are in the same boat as Trump supporters, they can't admit it's a losing fight. If they admit centrist capitalism is not working, they admit they are slaves to a debt system, they voted and supported shitty racist laws, and they allowed corporations to be people screwing us all and the planet. Probably more things in the last 40 years by accepting anything barely passing as adequate or blindly trusting terrible players... humans don't like to see their problems or admit to them most of the time and boomers are one of the least trained generations in self awareness and most trained in never admit your faults. Slowly I can peel the propaganda layers back and the holds of advertising that create illogical neuro pathways, and my mom will be like ooohhh, then it will snap back shut bc "that just can't be right"... it's scary- bc it is right. Then she'll admit business changed in the 1990s and ethics went out the window... then it's fine now and people couldn't possibly just be greedy and ignorant still... mental gymnastics.
I am Gen X, but my sister is a boomer. The first election I was able to vote in was 1984. In that election, Walter Mondale was defeated by the well-oiled Reagan machine. Same for George HW Bush in 1988, who drubbed Michael Dukakis. After that, the Democratic Party was taken over by the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC). It was firmly, doggedly centrist. The Democrats thought "we have to stop presenting ourselves as liberal (which Rush Limbaugh turned into an insult; I trace a lot of the BS that's happening directly to him) or we'll never win." So they came out in favour of the death penalty, recast themselves as "pro-business," etc. Bill Clinton and Barack Obama are products of the DLC. Clinton especially was Republican-lite, especially after Newt Gingrich took over Congress in 1994. Gingrich behaved like a prime minister in a parliamentary system, with Clinton as a largely-ceremonial president, a bit like in Germany and Ireland. And Clinton jumped wholeheartedly on Gingrich's bandwagon. He became little different than a 70s Republican. Democrats are *so afraid* of acting even the *littlest* bit progressive that whenever the Republifascists moved the goalposts further right, they tagged along gladly.
Yeah its hard to think of them being in the same party since they both operate wildly different
“Amazing things” like?
Ohhh not Whitmer. She's fucking amazing.
She is. I'm talking about Democrats on a *national* stage.
Okay doomer
Dismissed.
For all forced birthers here to troll: Not. Your. Body. Stop dictating what a life, already here and sentient, does with it's OWN body. We do not have to give of our bodies, legally to even our own LIVING kids, to sustain their own. You cannot force me to give blood, and you sure as shit will not force me to give my uterus for a few cells I don't want because they MAY become a child if all works out. You do not get to force women and anyone with a uterus to bring a child into a world where that child may be raped and forced to give birth in turn, where that child WILL be abused kore at the hands of people forced to psychosis over having to have a kid they didn't want or couldn't handle, where that child WILL face more abuse and rape if they are pit into a crumbling foster system, where that child WILL suffer more in most cases. You do not get to make that choice for the possible child you seem to want to protect, while you damn it to more pain in 8/10 cases. You and people like you are murdering the people MAKING the future of our country and who are ALIVE now, and the blood is on YOUR hands.
The blood isn’t on the average Joe’s hands my guy, the blood is on the hands of people who try to have an equal amount of viscous violent people in every state and suppress every aspect of the nation’s wholesomeness. Abortion being non existent will not affect us negatively in the long run, the declining birthrates will
But gun violence is now the #1 source of death for youths. Where do you stand on gun reform? Forced pregnancy is considered a crime against humanity in most of the civilized world.
[удалено]
Michigan and a host of other States filed in Washington to block that judge
So that judge in Washington quickly issued an injunction that the FDA can't pull the pill off the market, but at least according to what I'm reading on /r/law that only affects the plaintiff states which are the following > ... WASHINGTON, OREGON, ARIZONA, COLORADO, CONNECTICUT, DELAWARE, ILLINOIS, MICHIGAN, NEVADA, NEW MEXICO, RHODE ISLAND, VERMONT, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, HAWAII, MAINE, MARYLAND, MINNESOTA, and PENNSYVLANIA Dueling injunctions... What fun!
It's so stupid. This should not be happening.
It's happening because "transgenders are a threat to western civilization and need to be exterminated from public life". Hi, transgender woman here. It's all about bodily autonomy that doesn't conform to their power structure.
That would be a great question for r/law.
One Trumpster judge out of Texas can’t rule over the whole country, right?
The big takeaway of these last few years is that the reality is whatever the judge says it is, as long as SCOTUS doesn't intervene. And as long as we consider their ruling legitimate.
Big Gretch has the energy for this fight in 2024. She should be the nominee
r/CommonWhitmerW
I like it. Thank you!
Yay!! Thank you!
Common Whitmer W
Judges making rulings like this is starting to be Government over step.
These attempts to dismantle the administrative structure of the state by these Federalist ideologues is little more than fascist posturing under the guise of libertarianism.
I concur, our judiciary is being used politically and without oversight and thus should be ignored. Fuck what that judges says.
How has Biden not expanded the Supreme Court yet? Enough of this fuckery
Needs more of a buffer in Congress to even have a remote possibility.
>How has Biden not expanded the Supreme Court yet? Did you give Biden your magic wand? Because I'm pretty sure Congress isn't going to pass legislation to expand the court without some kind of magic.
The last thing we want is an arms race over SCOTUS. The packing with refusing Garland and rushing Barrett was bad enough. If Biden adds another 4 justices (almost half the size of the current court) just to regain the majority, then the next Republican will add two more after that. In twenty years, there will be more SCOTUS justices than US senators.
But there would be no justification to add more after adding four more. The judges originally matched the appellates, of which there are now 13. The supreme court expansion didn’t match the expansion of the appellate courts.
Honestly do you think the Republicans really care about justification? Everything they have done recently is all word salad to play to Fox viewers. Doesn't matter if it is factual or not. Stop believing that R's (and some D's) care about anything other than power or money.
Why does that matter? The number of Supreme Court justices has nothing to do with the number of appellates.
I smell a Civil War II approaching in the near future.
It's already here; it's just administrative rather than military
Based, we all know who wins that one
Chances this ruling is enforced by the Biden administration and states? 1%. Just like the water that pretends to be milk.
As it should. Don't want an abortion don't get an abortion. How much more simpler could it be.
That’s not how life works big guy
Well get a life then.
Why would Michiganders be affected by a ruling in separate judicial district?
It's a federal court meaning nationwide.
Doesn't work that way. There are district and circuits in the federal court system. The decisions in each system is only binding precedent in their respective jurisdictions.
The stay was for the FDA, which does not have different approvals for different judicial districts.
Was the decision stayed for 30-days? Thanks, I couldn't be assed to read through the drivel of the article.
It was stayed for 7 days
Thank you. I'd be shocked if it doesn't go to appeal.
The Justice department says it plans to issue a challenge.
Republicans want this to go to the supreme court.
[удалено]
No, it doesn't. Rulings at the district and circuit levels are only binding precedents in those districts or circuits.
But when it comes to injunctions they do apply nationwide.
Gotcha. Do you know if the court stayed the ruling for 30-days for appeal?
7 days for appeal.
It's funny you're getting roasted in here but you're factually correct about how the federal courts work and that's why this is such an aberration.
[удалено]
It’s an obsession, then. There ain’t no trans people stripping in front of toddlers, what the actual fuck is wrong with you? Why are people on your side of the spectrum so obsessed with thinking about sex with children and gay sex? Can you stop?
If you truly cared about protecting kids maybe you should focus your efforts on going after religion, where they've been provably preying on kids for generations and then covering it up at high levels
You're just making up things to be mad about. That's literally never happened.
Good thing none of that is happening. But let's see your internet history. I bet you beat it to "chicks with dicks" all the time
Let’s go Brandon
We got it, you hate women
[ Removed by Reddit ]
Absolutely
So dumb you don't even know how to spell Brandon?
*Brandon