So let me get this straight. The Supreme Court had time to hear a case where a bunch of doctors who have never had to perform a procedure might possibly have to hypothetically maybe perform it in the 0.000027% chance that they a person needs this procedure and the only one around is a fucking DENTIST to perform it, but they don't have time to hear a case over whether the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES CAN COMMIT TREASON? WHAT IN THE ABSOLUTE FUCKANORY IS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE!?!??!?!
PLEASE!!!! Someone explain why this is a higher priority.
@KellyScaletta It's incredible. Even regular old me who never studied law and only hears MSNBC legal pundits was here asking, "Who was harmed here? Who had standing to bring this case and how the hell did it get all the way up to the Supreme Court??”
@KellyScaletta It's not even a "procedure", it's a prescription. One that would be outside the scope of dentistry anyway, and therefore illegal for a dentist to prescribe. Not that legality seems to worry these people anymore.
@KellyScaletta And they are trying to argue - that they don’t want to have to treat a patient with medical needs! Good grief!
@KellyScaletta 2/2 These 7 docs have another solution: ban them from hospitals. Let them take the financial loss and take their complaints to slow-walking courts.
@KellyScaletta 1/2 Kavanagh made the point there is federal law that says docs do not have to perform abortions; however, I'll share a personal story: family member, radiologist, in hospital. PA announcement: Need doc to deliver a baby. He of course went, scrubbed, delivered the baby.