CNN presses Rep. Ocasio-Cortez over claims Biden admin should 'ignore' abortion ruling: 'Stunning po

[rangerrebew]

CNN presses Rep. Ocasio-Cortez over claims Biden admin should 'ignore' abortion ruling: 'Stunning position'
Story by Hanna Panreck • Yesterday 1:30 PM

CNN's Dana Bash pressed Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., on Sunday about her claim that the Biden administration should "simply ignore" the court's injunction on the abortion pill, mifepristone.
 
"What you just heard me ask the secretary about was something that you called on the Biden Administration to do, which is just to simply ignore the court ruling. That’s a pretty stunning position, if you think about it in the abstract about the notion of just ignoring a judge’s position, so my question is when this case is resolved by the Supreme Court, should the administration followed that decision if that decision ends up banning this abortion drug?" Bash asked.
 
"I want to take a step back and dig into the grounds around ignoring this preliminary ruling as well. There is an extraordinary amount of precedent for this. There is a term known as agency non-acquiescence, and this has been used in for focusing, this is a first, that this is precedent setting. It is not. The Trump Administration also did this very thing. But also it has happened before, the idea of consistency and governance until there is a higher court ruling is not an unprecedented thing to happen," she responded.

Ocasio-Cortez said the courts were making a "a mockery of our system, a mockery of our democracy and a mockery of our law" through the mifepristone ruling.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/cnn-presses-rep-ocasio-cortez-over-claims-biden-admin-should-ignore-abortion-ruling-stunning-position/ar-AA19ECLI?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=205a732a83e346c78eb4070b04c31d60&ei=29

[rangerrebew]

 So, the court's decision is making a mockery of the law but her position, as a person who writes laws, to ignore the court isn't making a mockery of the law she takes part in writing?

[verga]

She killed the Amazon deal, and can barely form a sentence on her own. Why does she keep getting elected.

[Fishrrman]

verga wonders:
"She killed the Amazon deal, and can barely form a sentence on her own. Why does she keep getting elected."

I can't believe this to be a serious question (no, really, I can't).

She has a "d" next to her name on the ballot.
In her district, whoever is up for election and has the "d" next to their name, will be elected.

She'll almost certainly be re-elected again and again, unless someone FURTHER LEFT than she is can beat her in the primaries.

In da Bronx, that's the way it is.

[verga]

verga wonders:
"She killed the Amazon deal, and can barely form a sentence on her own. Why does she keep getting elected."

I can't believe this to be a serious question (no, really, I can't).

She has a "d" next to her name on the ballot.
In her district, whoever is up for election and has the "d" next to their name, will be elected.

She'll almost certainly be re-elected again and again, unless someone FURTHER LEFT than she is can beat her in the primaries.

In da Bronx, that's the way it is.

@Fishrrman She beat a "D" That had been in for years and actually did positive things for them. She beat him in the Primary and yes got elected. Why hasn't another "D" tried to primary her out.