Panel approves OTC birth control option

So you are making a slippery slope argument. I think plan b is already over the counter.

 

They are coming. Don't say it can't happen

 

I guess they would excommunicate me for having a vasectomy.

 

Technically they are supposed to (in the RCC). But local pastors do not remotely act that way

 

So... the FDA is legally allowed to write national laws? I thought that was the U.S.Congress's job?

 

Generally, agencies are empowered by law to write regulations... it's always been like that ... even when Trump was president.

I know ... mind blown ... huh?

 

Birth control isn't abortion. But honestly, I hope a lot republicans take this up in 2024.

 

This is NOT about the day after pill? Sorry I thought it was about that abortion pill.

In that case I do believe that more young woman will take advantage of that freedom of not having to go to the family doctor to get that birth control pill. I always wondered why they had to see a doctor to get the birth control pill in the first place.

I don't see many states mandating an age... or parental consent, but you never know.

 

I do wonder how these pills work...

 

Lol.. you're behind the times my friend. Yes... mind is blown.

Supreme Court Signals Move Away from Judicial Deference to Administrative Agencies

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• In three decisions released late last month, the U.S. Supreme Court demonstrated increased skepticism of judicial deference to administrative agencies' statutory interpretations.
  
• While the decisions do not overrule or even mention Chevron[1] deference – the doctrine that courts generally should defer to a federal agency's interpretation of an ambiguous statute – the decisions open the door to more aggressive examination by the courts of agency interpretations that arguably stray from the underlying statutory language.
  

In a 5-4 decision a few weeks later, the Court in Becerra v. Empire Health Foundation[3] again made no mention of Chevron deference even though the majority noted that the underlying statute's "ordinary meaning … [did] not exactly leap off the page." Despite its initial conclusion that the ordinary meaning of the statutory language was unclear, the Court continued its recent pattern of (a) choosing to not apply Chevron deference directly and (b) instead performing textural and structural analysis of its own. Based on this statutory analysis, the Court in Empire Health concluded that the statute was "surprisingly clear" if read as technical provisions for specialists and that the language of the statute supported the agency's implementing regulation.


SCOTUS Rulings Shift Away from Administrative Agency Power

 

It looks like they will ban birth control pills on the same reasoning, saying it’s abortion. They really want to control women.

 

ACOG now supports it so we should be good with it.

Of note not directed at your post but just because a medication has been used for 50 years doesn’t mean it should be OTC.