Funding for “To the Contrary ” provided by The E. Rhodes and Leona B. Carpenter Foundation, the Park Foundation, and the Charles A. Frueauff Foundation.

Coming up, on To The Contrary.

Drug safety: who decides, the FDA or the Supreme Court: The justices heard that case this week and will decide by June.

Then there's new polling that shows President Biden now ahead in several key states, preset a Democratic victory in November?

Intro Music Hello, Im Bonnie Erbé.

Welcome to “To the Contrary, ” a weekly discussion of news and social trends from diverse perspectives.

Up first, a supreme Court divided on medical abortion?

While activists protested outside, inside.

During oral arguments, the justices seemed less divided than expected.

The question is whether the justices will take away the Food and Drug Administration's power to regulate pharmaceuticals.

The case was brought by a group of anti-abortion doctors who won't treat abortion patients or prescribe the pill Mifepristone, used in medical abortions.

The anti-abortion doctors want a nationwide ban on stone and to take away the power of the FDA to regulate prescription drugs.

The justices, in part, tried to figure out whether the doctors have so-called standing or the right to bring that question to the Supreme Court, but their ruling will have no bearing on the dozen states that have already outlawed or placed strict regulations on abortion, whether performed surgically or with prescription drugs.

Joining us today are former Maryland Democratic congresswoman Donna Edwards.

Tiana Lowe Doescher, conservative columnist for the Washington Examiner.

Carrie Sheffield of the Independent Women's Forum, and Erin Matson, co-founder of Reproaction.

So, Erin, you were, of course, observing closely what was going on at the court this week.

Were you surprised that at least if you base it on the questions and the arguments that the justices were exploring, it looks like it's going to be a 6 to 3 decision in favor of keeping the power to decide about pharmaceuticals with the FDA and not take it away from them.

Well, Bonnie, on its merits, this case is ridiculous.

The group that filed the lawsuit was hastily formed after the Dobbs decision, and they purposely wanted to put this in front of that judge in Texas, Judge Kaczmarek, to try to overturn the approval of Mifepristone.

But what happened is and what's clearly obvious is that this group doesn't have standing.

They say that they express a concern that they might be forced to treat a patient who experiences complications.

But the reality is, is that the drug is overwhelmingly safe and effective.

It's been approved and used since 2000 by the FDA.

Safer than Tylenol.

So there's none of these patients that they're that are showing up in the emergency rooms like they claim they are, and they've never had to treat them.

So the Supreme Court, even a number of the conservative justices, seemed to be acknowledging that.

Carrie, your thoughts.

Yeah.

So I'm again, disclaimer I'm here representing myself on this issue because Independent Women's Forum does not take an issue on abortion.

I agree with Erin that the argument here is about standing.

And so the plaintiffs with Alliance Defending Freedom, I have a lot of friends over there.

I don't think their strategy was robust because they should have gotten women who had suffered harm, who took the drug and then suffered the repercussions of it.

That was the issue.

and instead they were basing it on a hypothetical, that seems the justices seem skeptical.

I will say, though, that the their concern, I actually think their concern is a valid concern.

And they should have focused more on the women who have been harmed by this.

So I have a few studies here, for example, from the, the Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology that reported it was a longitudinal analysis from Finland of 40,000 abortions.

and they found chemical abortions, which are the pill abortions versus surgical abortions.

1 in 5 women undergoing these chemical abortions experienced sometime some type of complication.

And that's four times the number of complications for versus a surgical abortion.

there was another study from health services Research and managerial epidemiology.

They found, a greater risk of meeting emergency visits following a chemical, i.e., a pill abortion, than a surgical abortion.

And so the concern here and I the only thing I would push back on the framing, Bonnie, that you said there's there are three branches of government and there's supposed to be checks.

So there is a place for the judiciary to rein in the executive when the executive is not acting in the interests of health.

So that's the only thing I would say that I think there is there is precedent and need, because you can't have rogue agencies that aren't doing what they're supposed to do to protect people.

You need a check and balance.

I don't think, though, that they did their legal homework on this.

Wow.

so, look, I listen to the oral argument, and what was interesting to me is that, an overwhelming majority of the, justices really were very skeptical over standing this that, organizations and doctors that were in front of the court, one could not demonstrate that they had any, concrete harm that was done to them.

They have the ability to opt out for moral reasons, from prescribing the drug or from, treating, patients who might even come into an emergency room.

And so one was standing, but the other is do courts really?

Does the Supreme Court really want to be in the position of substituting its judgment for the judgment of the FDA and the agency that is studying, lots of different, research?

Some of the research that was even presented, to the lower court has been completely debunked.

And so I don't think courts want to be in that position.

I think it also has demonstrated that if the court decides that it's going to substitute its judgment, for the FDA, then it runs the risk of doing that for any number of agencies.

and, and granting standing to any number of people who can somehow claim some, you know, distant harm to the, to themselves.

and I just don't think the court wants to go down that route.

But, like, here's my question.

Here's my question on that.

If that's the case and I covered the court for nine years, the justices could have seen that these guys didn't have standing, in paper in, you know, in from the arguments below.

And they could have just not taken the case.

That's an easy one.

Usually they take these cases because there's a division between the circuits or, you know, it's an open question that hasn't been answered.

They actually said in Dobbs the case that outlawed, gave no national protection to women wanting abortions, that this was not a ruling on, birth control.

It was they were not going to go as far to extend their ban on Roe v Wade to include contraceptives.

And yet here they are considering that, to me, anyway, Tiana, as a long time observer and reporter covering the court, I was mystified by the decision.

Except to be clear that Mifepristone medical and chemical abortions are completely different medical formulation process from that of oral contraceptives or even emergency contraception.

Right.

Those are two completely different things.

But they said they wouldn't touch it, including Mifepristone Yeah.

But that's still constitute that's what constitutes an abortion where oral contraceptives do not once a pregnancy is implanted in the uterus.

Oral contraception emergency.

Contraception can't do anything, cannot terminate a pregnancy.

So I think that this this ruling, as well as the ruling that attempted to try and get Donald Trump off the Colorado ballot, sort of goes to dispel this notion that the Supreme Court has gone rogue in some way, that it's acting politically with a single minded agenda to advance, you know, Republican agenda, liberal agenda.

Look, still, even though unanimity in SCOTUS rulings has declined over time.

Still, 29% of all Supreme Court rulings are 9/0 decisions, and about half of all rulings are either unanimous or only have one dissenter.

So it's actually extremely common for there to be crossover for the quote unquote liberal justices to vote like conservatives and the conservative justices to vote like liberals because they are just looking in the at the jurisprudence.

And SCOTUS has been petitioned by plenty of cases that will hammer the overreach of the executive branch.

Things that challenge Chevron deference.

This was not one of those cases, for reasons that I think everyone else has eloquently described the legal, faults of this case and why it just failed to establish that standing, you know, as evidenced by the oral arguments, doesn't seem like you're going to get anything in their favor in the plaintiffs favor.

But again, and that's because SCOTUS they are not interested in the bottom line of policy, because that's not their job.

It is interpreting the law as written.

And so let me jump in here and say, okay, the justices are supposed to be above politics.

You know, an ivory tower.

and yet they're human beings.

They follow the news, as we know, with Justice Clarence Thomas, his wife, is heavily involved in lobbying on conservative issues.

so did they, Donna?

Did they look at what they had done to the Republican Party at all with the Dobbs decision and say, wait a minute.

We went a bridge too far?

Well, this is what I think, Bonnie, is that that the, Supreme Court right now is doing a lot of cleanup following the disaster of Dobbs and what has ensued, since then.

And they can say that they're removed from that, but clearly they have to be looking at what's happened around, in vitro fertilization down in Alabama.

What's happened with all of these laws across the state that have now gone in place, following Dobbs.

And so, I think that they that taking this case was about cleaning up the mess that they left, after that Dobbs decision.

You put it as cleaning up the mess, but Alito and Clarence Thomas and Amy Coney Barrett, they don't see it that way.

They see it as the state's taking over on whether women can have abortions or not, and that's just what they want.

Here's the thing, though, that, you know, politically, first of all, this is having a disastrous impact on the Republican Party, politically.

And we're going to see that play out.

through November.

But when I say clean up the mess, I mean that they have, I think in this case, one, they're going to dismiss on standing and they may even comment as well on the overreach of the court around the FDA.

I don't think they actually have to get there if they dismiss on standing because like these guys shouldn't be in court at all, but they may want to just wrap this, wrap this up.

And I think it's the only thing that they can do now following that Dobbs decision and on Amy Coney Barrett, and, you know, her two cohorts go anywhere.

No, they're not going anywhere.

But I think this is going to be an overwhelming decision that actually stops in its tracks.

This notion that states have unlimited right to nationalize, a policy on abortion rights.

I disagree with this notion of cleaning up a mess from the Dobbs decision, because even the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg said that the long standing row decision was very poorly decided from a legal jurisprudence standpoint.

So you have someone who is undeniably perceived as a feminist icon for pro-abortion ideas to say that the Roe v Wade decision was very poorly decided, and that the notion of returning it to the states is actually a constitutionally sound principle.

So I don't agree with that oh come on, Carrie, give me a break.

You cannot possibly attribute, the idea that Ruth Bader Ginsburg would have undone, Roe.

I mean, it really She said it herself You can look the quote up yourself.

She said it herself.

It was very poorly decided.

And the thing is the Dobbs decision.

If I can jump in there are plenty, there are plenty of legal scholars who agreed that it was poorly decided.

It was a conundrum.

But, you know, a shadow within shadows is somewhat like the verbiage that the court handed down, but that doesn't mean they were for overturning it.

I think your take you quote her proper, but that doesn't mean she wanted it overturned.

Well, and I would say to that then.

Then what?

How do you clean up that then?

They actually cleaned up a poorly decided decision with, with Roe.

So they were the ones doing the cleanup.

50 years of precedent Carrie.

The problem is, as Bonnie identified, the Dobbs decision even said in its ruling, I think, as Tiana said to this has nothing to do with IVF.

This has nothing to do with over-the-counter birth control.

These are entirely separate issues.

This was about the killing of an unborn child by your own will, for whatever reason you want.

That is the issue at play.

That has nothing to do with, tussling about creating an embryo or, in the case of prevention.

So prevention and termination are two totally different things.

So I think there's a conflation and unfortunately it's becoming a political hot potato.

I will say though, that when you're looking nationally at the polls, the things that people care more about are the kitchen table, economic issues.

They care a lot more about that.

They care more about immigration.

They care about what's happening with gas prices.

So I think abortion will be an issue, but I think it's going to be way lower on the priority list than it was in the election last year.

It's the number one issue for 1 in 5 Democrats, according to a recent poll.

But anyway, Erin, quickly on the way out.

I've spent my entire career working on abortion rights and reproductive rights.

Just want to close out with a few facts.

Fact.

the FDA approved Mifepristone in 2000.

It has proven overwhelmingly safe and effective.

And it works.

People are not experiencing difficult complications.

In fact, it's safer than Tylenol.

Fact, we are seeing people around the country of all political persuasions reacting in horror to the Dobbs decision and to the restrictions upon abortion.

Fact Anti-abortion groups are absolutely coming for IVF.

They're coming for contraception and every form of abortion.

So we do need to stay vigilant.

All right.

From the Supreme Court and medical abortions to the latest polling on the presidential race, President Biden is emphasizing his record on health care and women's issues in swing states as the presidential race heats up.

While polls still show a tight race and polls this early in the race are subject to change, there's early evidence his strategy might be working, according to new polls conducted by Morning Consult, Biden has pulled ahead in Wisconsin and tied Trump in Michigan and Pennsylvania.

Those three states together could hand him the president.

Trump still leads nationwide in most polls, but there is evidence that his lead is shrinking that could be fueled by Democratic backlash against the former president.

A new Associated Press poll found that Democrats were more likely to express anger and fear about the other side winning.

So Tiana is the is the prospect of another, Trump presidency more scary to, Republicans than not?

is it more scary to Republicans?

In other words, we know it's scary to Democrats, but is it also scary to some parts of the Republican Party that is really.

Not necessarily a unified party.

But I think the option of, in 2020, you were dealing with an unknown quantity.

Joe Biden saying, I will return this country to normalcy post-COVID.

I will bring back unity, you know, go back, recycle, rewind back to pre 2016.

And that clearly didn't happen.

We have the most radical progressive president since FDR.

Prices have increased 18% since Joe Biden took office.

Energy prices up 32%.

Food prices up 20%.

the median monthly payment for a new house up 50%.

The fact is, is that even if you hate Trump's tweets, even if you think the guy is kind of a jerk, most people's lives and especially young people's lives, and especially people who are living on a fixed income, has gotten materially worse.

You are paying more for less.

Your mortgage is more expensive.

Your paycheck has lost 5% of its annual purchasing power.

And so the idea of it being more of a gamble on Trump.

Look at the situation in Gaza.

Look at the situation in Ukraine.

Well, for all that Trump was accused of being nice to Putin, Putin didn't invade Russia when, or Putin didn't invade Ukraine.

When Trump was in power, Russia waited until you had Joe Biden because Joe Biden signaled weakness when he pulled out of Afghanistan.

He signified weakness in how he's handled Ukraine.

And that's another reason why the Israelis were slaughtered by Hamas.

And that's another conflict where a lack of American strength and a lack of our leadership on the global stage has just created more global chaos.

And there's further indication that all of the shipping So instead, you want somebody calling country leaders Rocketman?

That's a sign of strength that that seems like a. Kindergarten argument to me.

you know, says nice things on Twitter and then decides to blow up Kassam Soleimani in a totally legal strike, by the way, and isn't totally beholden by the pro Hamas faction of his party.

Look, it's the canard that Donald Trump is more of the uncertain quantity and it's the more radical quantity that might have been true in 2020, when Joe Biden was selling himself as the return to normalcy, decent elder statesman centrist.

That does not work when you have a president that is intentionally pursued the most inflationary agenda since LBJ's failed war on poverty.

Erin let's get back to [unintelligible] We have the worst legislation in 40 years.

Okay, Erin, let's get back to, the feminizing, if you will, of the, Biden campaign.

Is it a good idea?

Is it are women more important to turn out for the Democrats than men are for, Republicans?

Well, Bonnie, women voters are going to be so important in this election coming up.

And so, you know, I was really interested to see James Carville bashing on what he called the feminization of the Democratic Party, or that it's like getting too wussy.

I just, I don't, I can't compute why you would attack such an important component of your base as we just spoke about, people are outraged about the attack on abortion, on IVF, on contraception.

Women voters are going to be critical for Biden in order to get a get across the finish line.

And so, you know, I think people need to understand that women's issues are all of the issues, right?

And so women are important voters.

We're not a monolith, but heck, the Republican Party has sure given women voters a reason to run away as fast as they can.

Do you agree with what Tiana just posed, that, Joe Biden should be blamed for inflation, high interest rates?

No, no, I don't.

And I find this notion of stability under Trump to be just so laughable because I'm remembering what was happening with COVID, and suddenly I'm being expected to work and give my daughter virtual school at the same time.

That was the Trump administration that bungled the COVID response and led to such chaos.

We had.

I remember every single night on the news it was a new, drama, a new constitutional threat.

I can't even count the number of cases that are against him right now in the number of.

I try to track all of the various things that are, the criminal judgments, civil judgments, things of that nature that are being pursued.

So that's a chaos man.

I just I find it laughable on its face.

Biden is frankly, pretty boring.

And based on what we had before, that there's something nice about boring.

Well.

Look, I don't want to channel Erin here when she talks about facts, because here are some facts.

Inflation and core inflation are down.

Unemployment is at record lows.

The economy that our GDP is at record highs, the economy is, chugging along and it's not a surprise to me that these poll numbers are, especially in swing states, are starting to trend toward Biden, because how people feel about the economy, how they feel about the country, actually lags those economic indicators.

And so I think that from Biden's perspective, his campaign is exactly where it needs to be in order to get where it needs to be in November.

And you just look at the money advantage.

The, Biden campaign has a significant money advantage over Donald Trump.

Almost every dollar that's coming into the Trump campaign, most of it is actually going to pay his legal expenses.

the Biden campaign is opening up hundreds of offices, across these swing states.

The Trump campaign and the RNC are laying off workers, and they're not opening offices.

So I think that things are trending in the, president's direction.

And this notion that Donald Trump doesn't create chaos.

I think I agree with Erin.

It is absolutely laughable.

This is the king of chaos.

And his legal cases may mean that people are voting on somebody in November who potentially is a convicted felon.

I just have to accept the fact check real quick.

were going to close out with Carrie because we're about out of time.

[unintelligible] That's not even true.

But you know what?

[unintelligible] I want to point out that headline CPI is increased and wholesale PPI has almost doubled in the last month.

Okay.

but lets let Carrie in here.

Yeah.

So the fact is that median CPI median CPI is more impactful and meaningful.

It's the median 50 percentile of market basket of goods that the average family uses.

That's almost still 5%.

So you can throw out the nominal CPI.

But even more importantly is the pain index that people feel.

And that is off the charts still.

So when you're talking about the electoral map, Real Clear Politics has the, Electoral college right now with Trump at 312, Joe Biden at 226.

So it doesn't matter when you're talking about the swing states, it comes down to the brass tacks of who is going to win the electoral map.

And right now, Trump is overwhelmingly dominating again, over 300, 312.

So that's really I think what really matters is again, the pain.

And Tiana is exactly right.

Sure.

It might be softening a little bit right now, but you're talking about you know, now three and a half years of pain, sustained pain.

The average mortgage payment now is it's astronomically higher.

It's so much higher to pay off a mortage.

We're going to drop because of this recent decision by the National Association of Realtors to stop monopolizing Bonnie.

Bonnie, that's that 6% percent off.

but we're.

Still dealing with the highest mortgage rate in 40 years.

And that's going to persist if we continue to blow out the deficit.

If the Federal Reserve has to act.

[unintelligible] Home sales drop and as home sales drop, those and housing becomes cheaper, that's going to affect inflation too.

But in any event, that's it for this edition.

Keep the conversation going on all our social media platforms.

Thanks to the panelists for doing a great job, and please visit our website, pbs.org/tothecontrary and whether you agree or think To The Contrary.

See you next time.