mifepristone it s brought by doctors who sa they when they were in the emergency room, they cam across women who had bad effects, and therefore, in the future, they may somewhere a some point, encounter some woman who theoretically - and so that, typically, i seen as quite speculative, and not enough to get into federal court. instead, the fifth circuit has had, that s just fine. and that s a view of standin that perhaps - they don t know, perhaps - perhaps the supreme court ma decide it does not work fo them but we don t know. you are looking at m skeptically because we know how the court is - we know how the court has ruled on abortion and wher they stand ideologically let s just say it sure but there are a lot of reasons jurisprudence wise, this might bother them. absolutely. because this is preceden setting. setting aside the issue of abortion, what is bein proposed here legally is reall out of the ordinary and for th fifth circuit not to just toss this out on standin
well, mifepristone is stil available. isn t that actually a victor for people who are advocates o choice it seems like once you actuall get down to brass tacks, it is not a good ruling at all on lot of - for a number of reasons, for people who are advocates o folks having reproductiv choice the language in the opinion is striking, especially as i relates to standing, which i the legal right to sue i court. and on that score, the fifth circuit panel to trump appointees and th george w. bush appointee - pound for pound are in the plaintiffs camp here and remember, this case is brought by advocacy groups and for doctors. it is not brought by women who say they were armed by mifepristone it s not even brought by doctors who say they prescribe mifepristone it s brought by doctors who sa they when they were in the emergency room, they cam across women who had bad effects, and therefore, in the future, they may somewhere a some point, encounter some woman who theoretically - and so
health the principal deputy commissioner of the food and drug administration. he recently wrote an opinion piece in the new york time saying i worked for the fda, the abortion pill is dangerous i want to start with you on somewhat tactical that reall important thing here i will come to you docto sharfstein on the two appellat judges in the fifth circuit wh issued this complicated ruling one of the most importan things here is, and to the plaintiffs, the people suing these antiabortion groups, medical providers, who won thi bill taken off the shelves, do they have standing can they show the court ther is an injury, do they get to come into court and say, w were hurt by this decision those two judges upheld an that they do have standing why is that such a radical interpretation of this basic legal concept? the ruling might be complicated but it s actuall pretty simple. these plaintiffs just don have standing at all the court of appeals said thes plaintiffs, the organization o variou
in doing our jobs as legislators. to listen to the grief of ou people and active on it. the last thing, representative johnson, have there been incidents, understand they have bee lascivious frightening incidents of a sexual nature from which there have been no attempts to expel members, right well, absolutely. i mean, we have had members in each other s office chairs. we have had members, we have a child molester, we had a child molester on the house floor fo years. i brought, he was it admitte child molester i brought in an expulsion fo him. and i m cheering and education committee. he was a teacher and basketbal coach that sexually abused 3:1 year olds. and we try to expel him. and they said well, you know his voters knew and the electe him. so we can t overturn what they want it. unbelievable. we ll, please come back. we want to know what happens with their cases tennessee state representative justin jones and gloria johnson, we will be praying attention t
what they have a standin between the prosecutors and trial is a grand jury you have 23 people average citizens picked at random in new york county, manhattan, and they ha to sit in judgment and in th state system the prosecuto can t tell the grand jury want to do the prosecutor cannot sa i want you to indict trump all the prosecutor can do is bring the evidence donald trump actually had witness on his behalf there, and apparently the witness was coaching enough so that the da had to produce more evidence > they ended up bringing david pecker back who, already testified. so something happens there tha was not a trial, but the grand jury had questions the da has to persuade the grand jury, not by bullying no by violence not five horse but by the weight of the evidence, and that, apparently, the jury was persuaded.