GOP AGs Argue States Have Compelling Interest In Getting Teen Girls Pregnant!
Abortion pill case continues and the GOP can't stop shooting itself in the foot.
Don’t be upset, honey. You’re doing it for increased representation in the House!
Conservative lawyers — with the help of five out-of-state groups who formed a dummy organization in Amarillo, Texas, to take advantage of that district’s ironically liberal forum shopping rules — filed a lawsuit challenging the FDA’s approval of mifepristone with a 1-in-1 chance of landing before Trump appointed activist judge Matthew Kacsmaryk. That process ultimately didn’t work out, but now there’s a complaint brought by three Republican state attorneys general — not from Texas — who have run to Texas in a bid to grandstand a little for right-wing media clicks.
But have they solved the standing problems from the first suit? They think they have, and the answer is: the state has a compelling interest in getting teen girls pregnant!
The Questions To Make Fund Formation Your Competitive Advantage
The first time around, Kacsmaryk did what he was groomed to do and ordered the pill’s approval yanked on the grounds that medical scientists aren’t as good at medicine stuff as he is. The Fifth Circuit rubberstamped his opinion and James Ho introduced a new cockamamie theory of standing based on “random bystanders think babies are cute,” which may be true but is more a function of being able to give them back once they start crying. The Supreme Court rejected the standing theory in the case because it was, of course, gibberish cobbled together in crayon by a clutch of judges that the Court’s conservative majority keeps striking down. But Justice Kavanaugh set down his beer to draw a rough map for Kacsmaryk to try again with less risk of faceplanting. After inviting state AGs to enter the case with a slightly better shot of establishing standing, we’re back at the beginning.
Andrew Bailey of Missouri, Raúl Labrador of Idaho, and Kris Kobach of Kansas just delivered their 199-page amended complaint and they’ve got theories, man.
These estimates also show the effect of the FDA’s decision to remove all in-person dispensing protections. When data is examined in a way that reflects sensitivity to expected birth rates, these estimates strikingly “do not show evidence of an increase in births to teenagers aged 15-19,” even in states with long driving distances despite the fact that “women aged 15-19… are more responsive to driving distances to abortion facilities than older women.” The study thus concludes that “one explanation may be that younger women are more likely to navigate online abortion finders or websites ordering mail-order medication to self-manage abortions. This study thus suggests that remote dispensing of abortion drugs by mail, common carrier, and interactive computer service is depressing expected birth rates for teenaged mothers in Plaintiff States, even if other overall birth rates may have been lower than otherwise was projected.
To summarize, they’re arguing that there’s a study showing that 15-19 year-old girls are less likely to have babies when mifepristone is available online. Which might be true. It also might be true that teen pregnancy is just down because of birth control and condom availability and, just for shits and giggles let’s say abstinence education. But whatever the reason, how do teen pregnancy rates matter to this case?
Sponsored
CoCounsel: The legal AI Assistant And Tool Essential For Legal Teams
Learn How To Make A Difference For Survivors Of Intimate Partner Violence
Mitigating M&A Cyber Risk: Pre- & Post-Acquisition Due Diligence
Learn How To Make A Difference For Survivors Of Intimate Partner Violence
A loss of potential population causes further injuries as well: the States subsequent “diminishment of political representation” and “loss of federal funds,” such as potentially “losing a seat in Congress or qualifying for less federal funding if their populations are” reduced or their increase diminished.
Your eyes are not deceiving you. Republicans are arguing that teen pregnancy is good because it might lead to another House seat.
If you told young me that in the Year of Our Lord 2024 the Republican Party would be all in on “teen pregnancies are necessary” I’d have assumed some sort of dystopian Children of Men scenario was happening. This is the political entity that spent the 80s and 90s aggressively demonizing teen pregnancy as the final disgrace brought on by all the pre-marital sex MTV invented. It was pathologized from the White House as an “epidemic.”
Today, with a straight face, the same party argues that the state needs to knock up more kids. But I guess it’s the same party that fought the Cold War and now colludes with a KGB general so maybe times just change.
Sponsored
The Questions To Make Fund Formation Your Competitive Advantage
Ranking The Law Firms Lawyers Love
As shockingly cynical as the idea of cultivating a generation of unplanned children just to game the electoral college might be, the federal funding claim might actually be worse. This shouldn’t have to be said, but when the federal government hands out more funds based on population, the expectation is that the funds pay for the growing population. In other words, if the state doesn’t have another citizen, it wouldn’t need another citizen’s worth of funds.
Which is how they’re telling on themselves, of course. Republican state governments obsessively seek wealth transfers from the rest of the country. They want more bodies to claim more funds and then NOT actually spend the money on those specific bodies, but instead to funnel funds to the “people” they like. Maybe some retired athlete is looking to build a volleyball stadium or something.
That sound you’re faintly hearing might just be Kavanaugh and Roberts smacking their heads wondering how the rest of the conservative legal movement can’t help but invent increasingly embarrassing quotable material in their bid to own the libs.
For anyone concerned about reproductive health, it’s a dangerous world out there but as they say, for now, “it helps that our enemy is very stupid.”
(Amended complaint on the next page…)
Earlier: MAGA Judge James Ho Unveils New Injury Based On Conservative Tears
The Fifth Circuit’s Mifepristone Decision Is A Disgrace
Supreme Court Rejects World’s Dumbest Legal Theory, Accidentally Protecting Birth Control
Joe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter or Bluesky if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search.
