BLUE
Login
Profile banner
DS
👻 Desperately Shrieking Susan 👻
@susanrinkunas.com
Reporter: abortion & politics. Contributing writer, Jezebel. Seen in Slate, The New Republic, The Nation, The Guardian, and more. @wgaeast.bsky.social council. From PA, now in BK. ❤️‍🔥 linktr.ee/susanrinkunas 💌 susanrinkunaswrites @ gmail
7.4k followers1.1k following3.5k posts
DSsusanrinkunas.com

That kind of coverage of the SCOTUS decision will be weaponized by politicians who want to act like abortion won’t be banned if people vote for Republicans, or stay home. It’s Trump saying “there’s nothing happening there” re: Amy Coney Barrett all over again jezebel.com/abortion-acc...

Jezebel screenshot the agency. However, there is a threat in terms of media narrative. This case gives the Court a chance to look reasonable by ruling in favor of the FDA in a decision that would come out in the lead-up to a crucial election. Such a ruling could get the Court headlines that claim they "protected abortion" and "showed moderation," when all they really did was smack down a meritless lawsuit on standing grounds-and didn't rule on the underlying arguments of the case about whether the FDA properly approved the drug and later updates to the label. That kind of coverage could serve as insulation from calls for court reform and get weaponized by politicians who want to act like there's nothing to see here, and abortion won't be banned if you vote for a Republican, or stay home.
Jezebel screenshot Just think back to Donald Trump saying in a September 2020 debate that Joe Biden was wrong to note that then-nominee Amy Coney Barrett could gut Roe. "It's not on the ballot; there is nothing happening there," he proclaimed. "You don't know her view on Roe v. Wade." Abortion access is absolutely on the ballot. The next GOP president could ban abortion pills without this lawsuit, and without Congress, by simply enforcing the Comstock Act, a law from 1873 that's never been repealed. (And if Trump gets elected, he'd absolutely have on his Supreme Court shortlist a judge like James Ho, the Fifth Circuit troll who said the anti-abortion doctors have standing to sue because they like looking at pregnant patients and abortion causes them an "aesthetic injury.")
0
Profile banner
DS
👻 Desperately Shrieking Susan 👻
@susanrinkunas.com
Reporter: abortion & politics. Contributing writer, Jezebel. Seen in Slate, The New Republic, The Nation, The Guardian, and more. @wgaeast.bsky.social council. From PA, now in BK. ❤️‍🔥 linktr.ee/susanrinkunas 💌 susanrinkunaswrites @ gmail
7.4k followers1.1k following3.5k posts
HomePopularExplore