In 2000, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the chemical abortion drug. In 2022, a group of concerned healthcare professionals sued the FDA for its negligence in establishing safeguards prior to its approval of the drug. On Thursday, however, the U.S. Supreme Court threw out the suit. The FDA will continue its approval of the dangerous abortion drug, and women and babies will remain in harm's way. Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) attorneys represented the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, three other medical associations and individual doctors in a lawsuit against the FDA after insisting that the FDA is endangering women and girls. The doctors cited side effects of the drug including; ectopic pregnancies, severe bleeding, and life-threatening infections and noted. They also cited concerns over the fact that the FDA does not require these dangerous drugs to be taken at a doctors office. Women can take them alone at home or in their dorm room. Thirdly, the doctors noted that physicians should be required to report all serious complications from these drugs. As it stands now, they do not have to. A few months later, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled that the FDA did in fact act unlawfully with its removal of the necessary and important safety standards, and the case got moved up to the Supreme Court for review. This step was promising and the pro-life movement seemed hopeful on March 26, when oral arguments were held. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled Thursday that they would not reinstate any of the safeguards for the abortion pill. Due to this, the abortion pill will remain widely acceptable and will continue putting innocent babies and women at risk.  In response to the decision, pro-life individuals and groups were heartbroken and terrified for women and babies. “While we’re disappointed the Court did not reach the merits of the FDA’s unlawful actions, nothing in today’s decision changes this fact: women and girls are being harmed by the FDA’s recklessness. We will continue to advocate for women’s health and expose the careless actions of the FDA and the harms of abortion drugs,” ADF Senior Counsel Erin Hawley said in a statement. The Heritage Foundation’s Thomas Jipping, a senior legal fellow, and Melanie Israel, a visiting fellow, said the following about SCOTUS’ decision: Today's decision is not the final judgment on the safety or effectiveness of mifepristone, which we know is unsafe for women and causes up to 1 in 22 women to end up in the emergency room.   While legal technicalities might allow Biden’s FDA to continue manipulating its safety rules to push a pro-abortion agenda at the expense of health and common sense, women and girls taking these chemical abortion drugs are still in danger and largely left to fend for themselves.   Policymakers should be on the side of women’s safety by, at a minimum, demanding that the FDA follow its own original safety guidelines, not give abortion drugs a pass because of radical abortion ideology. March for Life President Jeanne Mancini felt similarly. She noted her disappointment in the decision and said, “The agency’s reckless removal of nearly all safeguards surrounding the drug — like the care of a medical provider and the requirement for prescribers to report medical emergencies — is unacceptable, and the FDA’s own label on mifepristone shows that roughly 1 in 25 women are forced to go to in the emergency room because of horrific complications.” “The abortion pill crisis will continue, as almost 2,000 children are killed by this method every single day. The Supreme Court cannot ignore this forever,” Lila Rose, president of Live Action wrote on her X account. What this shows is that even though SCOTUS overturned Roe v. Wade back in 2022, the fight for life and safety for women and girls is far from over.

Republicans can denounce Donald Trump, but it's never enough for MSNBC folks until you endorse the president.  On today's Morning Joe, Joe Scarborough wasn't satisfied with former Speaker of the House Paul Ryan's remarks on Fox News and lambasted Trump, calling him, among other things, an "authoritarian narcissist" who is  "unfit for office." That's not enough. Despite praising Ryan as a "wonderful man" and expressing gratitude for Ryan saying that he wouldn't vote for Trump, Scarborough was peeved that Ryan said that he doesn't support Joe Biden either, that his policies are "terrible," and that he would be casting a write-in vote for a Republican. Scarborough was confounded that Ryan wouldn't vote for Biden, wasting his vote on some Republican loser when he could be voting for Biden to block Trump's re-election. I'm grateful that Republicans like Paul Ryan are not voting for Donald Trump. Actually proving they actually believe what they've been saying their whole life. And that will be enough to defeat Donald Trump. I just remain -- I just wonder how you can say he's an authoritarian, he's a threat to American democracy, he doesn't have the character to be president, but I'm not going to vote against the one guy, I'm not going to vote for the one guy that can keep him out of office. Maybe it means Ryan doesn't really think he's a "threat to democracy," but that he thinks Trump expects everyone in his party to bow to all his wishes and echo all of his boasting that he is the greatest president. Speaking of who's the greatest president, Scarborough had to turn the show once again into Morning Advertisement.  if you feel like democracy's on the line, if you feel there is an authoritarian in waiting, what is so offensive about voting for a man who's presided over the strongest economy in the world, an economy that the World Bank yesterday said is fueling the world's economy. The Dow's at over 40,000. We've never been stronger economically relative to the rest of the world since probably, since 1945. Our military's, relative to the rest of the world, never been stronger than it is today, either. He's still narrowcasting into the White House residence. This is the same guy who proclaimed in March: "F-you if you can't handle the truth. This version of Biden -- intellectually, analytically -- is the best Biden ever!" Note: Panelist Donny Deutsch won the award as the biggest virtue-signaling suckup o' the day. Donny said that women, along with people over 65,  are "the two smartest groups in this country," and that "women are wiser than men." There's your Morning Sexism. Here's the transcript. MSNBC Morning Joe 6/13/24 7:02 am EDT MIKA BRZEZINSKI: So, former Republican House Speaker and board member of the Fox Corporation, Paul Ryan, appeared on Fox News earlier this week. And, drum roll please, criticized Donald Trump, and calling him unfit for office. PAUL RYAN: [Speaking with Neil Cavuto] It's going to be a very, very close race. I think there're terrible choices we're being presented with. And that's just the fate of -- that's what the primary voters selected, and I regret the fact that that's where we are. NEIL CAVUTO: All right. Now I know a lot of these folks who also shared your same concerns about Donald Trump, that sort of said all right, we're rallying around Donald Trump. You had said, though, that would not be the case with you. You had said he's a populist and an authoritarian narcissist. That character is too important to me, and it's a job that requires the kind of character he just doesn't have. That's pretty strong. RYAN: Yeah, that's the way I feel. I agree with that. I don't support Biden either. I think his policies are terrible. I hate the fact that I feel like I gotta write in a Republican like I did the last time in 2020. I voted for him in 2016, hoping that there was going to be a different kind of person in office. And I do think character is a really important issue. If you put yourself above the Constitution, as he has done -- CAVUTO: But what happened? What turned you on him?   RYAN: I don't think he is fit for office. CAVUTO: Was it the January 6th thing? RYAN: That's a part of it. I think it's a contribution [sic] of factors. But I think it really is his character at the end of the day. And the fact that if you're willing to put yourself above the Constitution, an oath you swear when you take office, federal office, whether it is President or Member of Congress, you swear an oath to the Constitution, and if you're willing to suborn it yourself, I think that makes you unfit for office. . . .  JOE SCARBOROUGH: Willie, I've known Paul for a very long time. He actually, he worked for a group of us when I first got to Washington. And I love the guy. I really do. I mean, he's just a wonderful guy, a wonderful man. And I'm so glad he's speaking out. I think he's on the Fox board or the News Corp board or one of the boards. So he's in a position of authority over there. And that's not something a lot of people would do. You know, to speak out like that. So I appreciate that. I will say, the thing I don't understand is, understanding that this guy's an authoritarian, understanding the dangers that he presents, and then saying, well, I can't stand Joe Biden either.  And I'm going to vote for -- I hate his policies. I'm going to just write in a vote. Well, if you feel like democracy's on the line, if you feel there is an authoritarian in waiting, what is so offensive about voting for a man who's presided over the strongest economy in the world, an economy that the World Bank yesterday said is fueling the world's economy. The Dow's at over 40,000. We've never been stronger economically relative to the rest of the world since probably, since 1945. Our military's, relative to the rest of the world, never been stronger than it is today either. So, I just -- I'm grateful that Republicans like Paul Ryan are not voting for Donald Trump. Actually proving they actually believe what they've been saying their whole life. And that will be enough to defeat Donald Trump. I just remain -- I just wonder how you can say he's an authoritarian, he's a threat to American democracy, he doesn't have the character to be president, but I'm not going to vote against the one guy, I'm not going to vote for the one guy that can keep him out of office. . . .  SCARBOROUGH: When I was running for Congress -- I wish we had the bell here. We could hit the bell. MIKA: Ring! Where's our bell? SCARBOROUGH: I would, I would go into churches and I would talk and say, don't vote for me because I'm the best Christian. I'm not. Vote for me because you believe in the same things that I believe in. MIKA: Right. SCARBOROUGH: And I won at a young age. And then, a couple years later, I would see other Republicans going and quoting Bible scriptures, like 2 Corinthians, and things they didn't know. And I'd pull them aside, and I'd go, dude, you're not a preacher. You're a politician. Just tell what you believe politically, and they'll do the rest.

Four people involved with a primary race in Connecticut several years ago now face criminal charges related to election fraud.The case relates to the 2019 Democratic mayoral primary in Bridgeport, the most populous city in Connecticut. In that race, state Sen. Marilyn Moore took on longtime incumbent Mayor Joe Ganim, whose tenure in office was interrupted while he spent seven years in prison for 16 felony charges related to political corruption.'I did not fill it out or sign it. It also had my name misspelled.'On Primary Election Day that year, Moore seemed to eke out a victory. However, after absentee ballots were tallied that evening, Ganim was pronounced the winner by a mere 270 votes.Last year, four years after that primary race, state election officials voted unanimously to recommend criminal charges for various campaign workers affiliated with it. Now, such charges have finally been filed.The lone Moore campaign official to be charged is Josephine Edmonds, who has been accused of mishandling ballots and tampering with a witness. One of the absentee ballots that Edmonds allegedly altered even repeatedly misspelled the voter's name."I was shown an absentee ballot application," the voter said in a sworn statement. "I did not fill it out or sign it. It also had my name misspelled. I told this to the Court, also saying I had never seen that before."Moore stated that she is relieved that bad actors, including perhaps a former member of her team, may finally be held accountable for their actions during that campaign. "For me, it doesn’t matter who did it," she said Tuesday. "... Wrong is wrong."The three others charged in connection with this case all worked for the Ganim campaign, and two of the three also happen to be Democratic officials in Bridgeport. Alfredo Castillo is a Democratic city councilman, and he faces charges related to mishandling and illegally possessing absentee ballots A former resident of Castillo's district alleged that Castillo picked up an absentee ballot from his home before he ever had a chance to fill it out. Castillo initially denied knowing the resident or working to procure him an absentee ballot. He then later reportedly admitted that his handwriting appears on portions of the ballot but continued to say he never took possession of it."Not me. I didn’t take no absentee ballot. I don’t do that," Castillo said, according to the CT Mirror. "I don’t touch none of that stuff. … He didn’t give me no ballot."Wanda Geter-Pataky, a longtime supporter of Ganim, is the vice chairwoman of the city’s Democratic Party. She has been accused of tampering with a witness and filling out an absentee ballot for another person without proper authorization."Wanda told me to only sign the bottom of the blank application," one acquaintance said, according to charging documents. "She told me not to put the date on the application. I believe Wanda Geter helped me with the application by filling in the upper portion, but I did not see her write on this document. I signed the bottom of the application."Geter-Pataky has also been accused of stuffing ballot boxes at City Hall in the days leading up to the 2023 Democratic primary between Ganim and challenger John Gomes. The accusations led to a primary-election redo, though Ganim was ultimately declared the winner of both the primary and the general election.Such 'inaction is an affront to good governances and transparency.'The final Ganim campaign worker charged in connection with the 2019 race is Nilsa Heredia. In addition to similar charges related to mishandling or illegally possessing ballots, she has also been slapped with one count of witness tampering after she allegedly asked a witness not to talk to investigators.Chief State’s Attorney Patrick Griffin claimed he hoped that all these charges might help restore faith in the voting process: "I appreciate the attention and time the Statewide Prosecution Bureau put into these investigations. I hope these prosecutions will send a message that deters tampering with election results in the future in Connecticut."Ganim's office said only that it had just learned about the charges. "We have not been provided with any details other than what is contained in media reports," the office said in a statement.Frank Ricci, a New Haven fire chief and fellow at the Yankee Institute, told Blaze News that he is outraged by the near silence from Ganim, claiming that such "inaction is an affront to good governances and transparency." "Rooting out alleged corruption should transcend partisan politics and is the responsibility of the mayor’s administration and law enforcement," Ricci said. "It’s concerning that previous allegations in 2019 didn’t result in any internal employment action. It’s disturbing that the 2023 allegations has so far resulted only in the taxpayers footing the bill for paid leave."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The league’s latest behavior continues its thoroughgoing capitulation to China in pursuit of profit.

Rep. Adam Schiff Repeats the Word 'Guilty' 34 Times at Hearing on Trump Prosecution

Climate Nutjobs Form Human Circle Around Citi Employees Trying to Get to Work

Cold War Redux: American and Russian Navies Play Tag in Waters Near Guantanamo Bay, Cuba

Federal Judge Demolishes the Biden BATFE's 'Pistol Brace' Rule

Samsung will reportedly launch the Galaxy Z Fold 6 and Flip 6 next month. It could be just in time to promote the new foldables during the Summer Olympic Games in Paris. The increasing frequency and variety of leaks seem to support those rumors. Most of Samsung's secrets for a new generation of Galaxy flagships leak well before the Unpacked press release. The newest Galaxy Z Fold 6 leak concerns the foldable's price, and it's not good news. Apparently, the handset might be more expensive than last year. That's certainly an unusual development, considering that Samsung has to face better competition from Chinese smartphone vendors. A higher price point will make the Galaxy Z Fold 6 even less appealing. The upside is that Samsung might introduce a cheaper Galaxy Fold 6 variant later this year, though it's unclear how much that model would cost. Continue reading... The post Galaxy Z Fold 6 price leak has me hoping a cheaper version is coming appeared first on BGR. Today's Top Deals Today’s deals: $189 Apple Watch SE, $299 3D printer, $829 M2 MacBook Air, $300 GoPro HERO12 Black, more Today’s deals: $150 Beats Solo 4, $55 HP printer, $248 Sony XM5 earbuds, 25% off eero Pro 6E, more Today’s deals: $30 Thermacell mosquito repeller, $16 wireless fast charger, $140 eufy robot vacuum, more Amazon gift card deals, offers & coupons 2024: Get $380+ free

Making his first public comments since Hunter Biden was convicted on felony gun charges earlier in the week, President Joe Biden reiterated Thursday that he would not pardon the first son and also ruled out commutation of his sentence.