Search Results: what's more appealing

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/texas-abortion-pill-mifepristone-ruling_n_638a4b6ce4b0ca11e4123535
Texas Judge Halts FDA Approval For Abortion Pill Mifepristone

In a massive win for opponents of abortion rights, a Texas judge ruled on Friday that the U. S. Food and Drug Administration’s 2000 approval of abortion pills was unlawful.

Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk ruled that the FDA “manipulated and misconstrued” certain parts of the drug approval process in order “to greenlight elective chemical abortions on a wide scale.” Throughout the decision, Kacsmaryk used anti-choice rhetoric including terms like “unborn child,” “chemical abortion” and “abortionist” to describe medication abortion, a safe and effective regimen used for nearly 60% of all abortion and miscarriage care in the U. S.

The ruling does not go into effect for seven days, giving the Biden administration time to appeal. Scroll below to read the decision in full.

In the first footnote of the 67-page document, Kacsmaryk explains why he believes using the term “fetus” is inaccurate while the terms “unborn human” or “unborn child” are appropriate, citing an anti-choice book titled “Embryo: A Defense of Human Life.”
“Considering the intense psychological trauma and post-traumatic stress women often experience from chemical abortion, this failure should not be overlooked or understated,” Kacsmaryk wrote in the decision.

Kacsmaryk’s statement echoes frequent claims of anti-choice advocates who believe that abortion harms women’s mental health and that many women regret their decision to get abortion care. But, according to the Turnaway Study, which followed 1,000 women over 10 years and analyzed the long-term effects of abortion access, abortion does not harm women’s mental health, and 95% of women who have abortions said their decision was the right one for them.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/dilemma-judge-trump-case-whether-115552996.html
Dilemma for Judge in Trump Case: Whether to Muzzle the Former President

As a former president and the de facto leader of the Republican Party, Donald Trump is one of the most powerful people in America.

But as a criminal defendant within the confines of the Manhattan courtroom where the case against him will play out for months to come, Trump is under the authority of someone else: the presiding judge, Juan Merchan.

The two men came face-to-face Tuesday, after prosecutors with the Manhattan district attorney’s office unveiled 34 felony charges against Trump. When the prosecutors raised some of the former president’s recent social media posts, including one warning that “death and destruction” could follow if he were charged, Merchan asked that Trump refrain from making comments that were “likely to incite violence or civil unrest.”

But after the hearing, Trump returned to Florida and to his old habits, calling the district attorney, Alvin Bragg, a “criminal,” and Merchan “a Trump-hating judge with a Trump-hating wife and family.”

Merchan’s warning and Trump’s reaction later that evening provided dueling examples of what will almost surely be a delicate dance. The former president, who is running to take back the White House, will have to appeal to a political base that feeds on his unrestrained rhetoric without crossing a line that might cause the judge to take action against him.