Things that made you laugh today (Political Version)

[Seran]

The FDA isn't the sole federal authority.. as evidenced by the lawsuit.

Honestly, what is it like to be this fucking stupid everyday?

Yeah? Which other federal agency is responsible for green lighting medications? A snapshot from an article on the NIH website.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is the federal agency responsible for labeling medications and supplements. However, the approval process is different for prescription and for over-the-counter medications.

[Shaps]

Yeah? Which other federal agency is responsible for green lighting medications? A snapshot from an article on the NIH website.

I know you're a fucking moron, and it's pointless... but here's some reading for you.

https://prescriptiondrugs.procon.org...om-the-market/

Morons outnumber the logical these days, and you're just another example.

[Seran]

I know you're a fucking moron, and it's pointless... but here's some reading for you.

https://prescriptiondrugs.procon.org...om-the-market/

Morons outnumber the logical these days, and you're just another example.

That's not what he said, not-Parkbandit, if you're going to help, try assisting with the answer rather than a pointless diversion.

[Parkbandit]

Yeah? Which other federal agency is responsible for green lighting medications? A snapshot from an article on the NIH website.

If the FDA is the sole authority for medication.... why it's in front of a Federal Judge?

I thought that was obvious.. but here we are having to explain it to you.

SPOILER: If the FDA was the sole authority, the Court system wouldn't be able to do a single thing.

Also, the FDA is under the control of the President, via the Secretary Health and Human Services and that position is approved through the Senate.

[Parkbandit]

Also, this:

the FDA's sole federal authority regarding prescriptions.

Is not the same as this:

Yeah? Which other federal agency is responsible for green lighting medications? A snapshot from an article on the NIH website.

Nice try. For you I would give you a 3 for the attempt... for normal people, a zero.

[Gelston]

And yet you seem to think a medication approved by the federal government, found safe and made available with a prescription for two decades is something a federal judge has the jurisdiction to restrict, simply because a group of bible thumpers have asked him to. As if simply asking for an order gives a judicial officer unlimited power to grant whatever they want regardless of circumstance merely by wishing it so.

So you think the Executive Branch doesn’t answer to the Judicial in any way at all?

[time4fun]

So you think the Executive Branch doesn’t answer to the Judicial in any way at all?

+1 to the point being made here.

Let's just be CRYSTAL clear: the Executive Branch has no authority under the Constitution to ignore Judicial oversight.

Seran, this whole "the decision is optional because I don't agree with it" thing is dangerous talk. That's failed democracy talk.

Our democracy is barely holding up against one party's attacks against it. It will not survive two parties attacking it.

If the Executive disagrees with a Judicial decision, their ONLY remedies are to appeal the decision or to work with Congress to change the law.

[Seran]

If the FDA is the sole authority for medication.... why it's in front of a Federal Judge?

I thought that was obvious.. but here we are having to explain it to you.

SPOILER: If the FDA was the sole authority, the Court system wouldn't be able to do a single thing.

Also, the FDA is under the control of the President, via the Secretary Health and Human Services and that position is approved through the Senate.

You've hit the nail on the head, just why is it before a judge who has no jurisdiction over the matter? I'll tell you, it shouldn't be.

The federal judicial system has absolutely no involvement in approving or denying a medication making it through the FDAs rigorous vetting process. It's all the FDA. This judge is trying to seek through an injunction to supercede the FDAs sole authority in the matter by imposing Jude-Christian beliefs RETROACTIVELY in a decision that was already made. Approval was made, Bible Thumper Inc applied for an FDA appeal of it's approval, that was reviewed and denied. Petitioner Bible Thumper Inc is asking a sympathetic judicial officer to override the competent authority on the basis that Bible Thumper Inc on the sole basis that they didn't like the FDAs two separate decisions.

[Seran]

Seran, this whole "the decision is optional because I don't agree with it" thing is dangerous talk. That's failed democracy talk.

See above. This isn't an instance where the federal executive authority failed in it's duties or superceded it's mandate granted by the legislative branch, this is a judicial officer issuing an injunction because the citizen's group disagrees with abortion.

You think that a district Court Judge having more authority than the Executive Branch performing duties at outlined by the Legislative Branch because of a belief their ideology supercedes law isn't a failure of our democracy? I'd be surprised if you did.

[Seran]

So you think the Executive Branch doesn’t answer to the Judicial in any way at all?

Not what I'm saying at all actually, the opposite in fact. Where the Executive and Legislative branches are working within the legally defined parameters of the law, the judicial branch has no authority to affect a misinterpretation of the law.