c-span is your unfilted view of government. >> you think this is just a community ceer? it is way more than that. >> students from low-income families can get tools they need to be ready for anything. >> comcast supports c-span as a publ service along with these other televion providers giving you a front row seat to democracy. fda by rolling the pill should not have been approve the department said at u.s. district judge upended decades of reliancof the abortion pill based on the courtown misguided assessment of the drug safety. the laboratory that sells the pill filed a similar mion and

the company said in addition to the potential armhe ruling posed, it threatened their livelihood as a one drug company. that is the appeal that was filed. the new york times followi up its -- with i lead story. 400 leaders uer the headline, drug executives condemn a willing on the -- condemn a rulingn the abortion pill. the writer writes, -- and companies, none of which make drug, the first pill in the two drug abortion patient regim, the reach of the case sttches beyond abortion unlike roe v. wade, this one could challenge the foundation of the regulatory system of all medicines in the u.s.. if courts -- complexity required

to fully -- any medicine is at risk for the same outcome as mr. pristone makes the statement. your thoughts on the decision that came down last friday from the texas drug on the fda process. if you support the judge's decision, (202) 748-8000 the number to call. if you oppose it, (202) 748-8001 . for texas residents, (202) 748-8002. if you want to text your thoughts, you can do that at (202) 748-8003. it was the white house press conference yesterday ready secretary was asked about the

decision. >> -- ♪ >> --[video clip] >> the medication is used safely in more than 60 countries, providing critical care for women and this court decision threatens access to this medication which is used not only for abortion but also for other critical purposes like helping women manage miarriages. if the decision stands, it puts won's health on risk and undermines the fda's ability to ensure our patients have access to safe and effective medication when they need them the most. this decision further strikes away american's fundamental freedom and interferes with a woman's ability to make their cision with their own body and this is a step to the ultimate

goal of antitrust -- anti-choice. host: that is from the white house press briefing and a follow-up story via yahoo! news that you can find online. onof the thousands of urgent questions about what would happen if the willing remains in effect if whether or not the manufacturer of -- the manufacturer of the drug could file for another application. -- the fda takes 10 months to review. kristin more of the emaa project explained monday, we could be facing a scenario where the medication is only available in a criminal trial setting and not available to patients in the real world and even if everyone wants to move fast, is

upsetting to think about it. the story saying that lawyers for -- there is a lot of legal activity that will happen between today and friday. a senior staff attorney for the senate staff -- we have not seen a single digit date from wind the decision came out and -- there is more decisions that need to come out but if kacsmaryk's ruling goes into effect, it will represent -- that is some of what has happened in the last couple days concerning the texas judge decision and you can tell us whether you this -- you support that decision or oppose it. if you support it, (202) 748-8000. if you oppose it, (202) 748-8001

. four texas residents, (202) 748-8002. text us (202) 748-8003. for the oppose line, we will start with robert. robert, you are on, go ahead. caller: all i have to say, there are a lot of people who are antiabortion. what are they doing, anti-kids getting killed in school? that is what is getting me upset and my wife, they can yell about unborn babies but they don't yell about kids being killed at our schools. host: the texas decision, what do you think about that? caller: i don't think they should do it. it is a woman's right to be able to take a pill or have the abortion. it is under certain circumstances, i agree. maybe thershouldn't be. it should be available as far as the pill. host: robert in melbourne,

florida. this is from david. we set aside a line for texas residents. davis it -- david in dallas, hello. caller: hello, pedro. i oppose that judge's decision. it is typical, the texas won't allow marijuana to be legal. i cannot go to a gun show to purchase a gun and for a record, i am a felon but it is purposely -- perfectly legal, if i go to a gun show and purchase a gun at the parking lot. host: to the decision itself on the fda approval process, why do you oppose it? caller: a woman has a choice and i have a friend who will go out to a club and if she meet someone, -- she meets someone, she willake the pill.

the morning after. it is spineless of the democrats. they are like jellyfish. ey let the republicans get away with anything they want. it is not just abortion, they gerrymander and disrespect certain presidents. certainly roe v. wad and they want to have their way. the vast majority of the united states agrees that a woman has a right to choose a but they tend to do what they were -- their way -- they tend to do it their way. the democrats are spineless. host: richard in losngeles, california. on the oppose line. hello. richard in california, hello? go ahead. one more time for richard. caller: this is richard speaking. host: you are on, go ahead. caller: there is a book called

human errors. there's a chapter in it that describes in detail the proems and issues with wen and their reproductive accs. i recommend everyone access and read the chapter. it will enlighten everyone on both sides of this issue. we can make lots of compromises on this issue with the other side but they are not willing to compromise ever. host: the texas judges decision, what do you think? caller: it is nonsee. host: why is that? caller: because of all the reasons stated by supporters of this -- one primary reason is because will reduce the bloody, other method of abortion. it could eliminate it. what is wrong with that? host: sporter of the justice

decision, levi, brooklyyou marked -- brooklyn, new york. caller: good morning. i supported for a number of reasonjust like i support -- i support it for a number of reasons just like i support abortion. margaret sanger, the founder of land parenthood, -- planned parenthood,tarted planned parenthood to exterminate the black race. go gooe that. that is whathe did. host: you are calling you say yosupport the fda decision on the suppt of the bill. caller: i support market sanger -- margaret sanger to eliminate the black race -- host: that is an inappropriate caller and we will not allow that. heo. caller: i will li to say this.

no one tells a man what to do with their body and no one to tell a woman what to do with theirs. whatever their decision is, that is their decision. host: to the texas decision specifically, what did you think of the judge's decision? caller: i think the judge thinks he can do whatever he wants to do and he is totally out ofine to go ainst two dades of scientific da that supports that drug and nab event that he isllowed to get away with that, -- and in the event he is allowed to get away with that, you will see that in other states where people who think like he does. he is not a doctor. host: vanessa in san antonio, texas.

i live fotexas residents available at -- a line fotexas residents available at (202) 748-02. the ruling in texas and united states and what it might mean for the biden administration and others who fight against the ruling. the ruling may not be compatible and -- an order that would bject dco a others at risk to criminal liability but it does not direct the fda to do anything. the lings have created uncertaiy that the department -- just as the -- clarification about how the tool rulings interact and officials from the 17 states backing the case in spokane told rice in a meeting that there was noeed for him to clarify his order or accelerate proedings.

the doj rt was motiowas short on --this court order w crystal clear. defendant's motion to give the court little to rule on -- court little to consider and nothing to rule on. (202) 748-8000 if you suppt the texas judge's decision and if you oppose that, (202) 748-8001 and those texas residents, (202) 748-8002. paul in florida on the oppose line. caller: i have a question that i ve been wanting task for years on programs like yours. that is why hasn't the morning pill ever been discussed by anyo ne? the morning-after pill to prevent 80% of all unwanted

presidencies -- pregnancies, why hasn't anyone said two words out this bill? --pill? it is a safe pill and it does not interact with any other drugs known to man and it would prevent so many unleaded pregnancies -- unwanted pregnancies. i am a republican and i take it as a slur and insult to say i am a republican and be thought of as being completely antiabortion. th is a lie. republicans understan that an on what privacy can be atraumatic -- that an unwanted pregnancy and be a dramatic -- can be atraumatic thing in a life of a woman? host: why do you oppose it specifically?

caller: have you published the requirements from the first film? have you published the dangers of taking this bill? have you? host: [indiscernible] caller: it is dangerous if you take it after eight months of privacy. -- pregnancy? host: that all said, you still oppose the texas judge's why is that -- judges --judge's decision, why is that? caller: in a rut respect -- in what we expect -- in what respect? i oppose a logical answer to the whole question of abortion. these ancillary arguments about a drug, what has to happen is a

resolution that makes both sides of this issue the most unhappy -- host: joel is next,. arkansas support like -- goal is next, arkansas, support line -- joel is next, arkansas, support line. caller: one day, you are going to die and your soul is going to to heaven. if your name is not in the book of life, you will stand before god and he is going to say to you turn away from me. you commit a sin. -- committed sin. he sent a man on this are to give you away -- on this earth to give you a way to go to heaven. host: your religious beliefs decide -- aside, why do you support the texas sen. sinema: --texas judge's decision?

caller: we killed many babies already, how much more going to kill? host: in georgia, our support line. caller: why can't they take birth control or use condoms? i had a girlfriend and it bothered her every day for her life because she had a abortion -- an abortion. i don't understand why people n't get condoms and have this kind of sex. it doesn't make sense. host: the discussion is on this judge's decision and the abortion judge- drug. you oppose it, why is that? caller: i oppose people not taking birth control.

because the psychological effects of these women have been done, it will be with them for the rest of their lives. host: that is al in georgia. mpr writes about certain states and specific states are preparing in their own states in light of the decision yesterday and what might come of it through the legal process. this is the mpi -- thepr story. it says at's the -- it says that several states are there. a governor says they planned an emergency stockpile. while california is quoted saying, -- medication abortion, the state negotiated a purchase an emergcy stop pa in anticipation of the ruling by a far right federal judge to

ensure that california remains a safe haven for safe and affordable and accessible reproductive care. the massachusetts governor said her state has stockpiled 15,000 pills, more than eight years worth of doses. last week, jay inslee had a stockpile worth three years. the protocol approved by the food and drug administration 2000," christian of abortion -- antiabortion groups suing the fda. if you support the decision out of texas conrning the abortion drug, (202) 748-8000. if you oppose it, (202) 748001 . if you are a texas resident, (202) 748-8002 is how you let us know. texas at -- text us at (202)

748-8003. let hear from sheila -- let's hear from sherag [indiscernible] host: hello, are you there? caller: this is for the women -- for the abortion? st: lowering in california -- lauren in california. oppose line. caller: i oppose this ruling. i oppose the supreme court reversing roe v. wade. i feel these rulings have made women second-class citizens is -- of america and i am mad as heck about it and every time

take -- the gop takes t rights away from americans, they will lose another butter. they care more about guns and -- then they care about the women and children of this country and it makes me mad. host: why do you oppose the texas ruling specifically? caller: he is judging people. the ruling makes no sense. he uses the concept --comstack ruling, the supreme court said it was an invalid lot in the 60's --law in the 60's. he calls the fetus is unborn -- fetuses unborn human and children. he is judging people wrongly in his entire rolling. it is completely wrong and it is saying that women are

second-class citizens in this nationecause men can tell them what they can do with their bodies and that is wrong. host: that is lorene in california givin her thoughts. the former product -- the former vice president putting a statement saying the fda acted carelessly with blatant disregard of human rights. today's ruling xes a 20 year wrong. one of the other people on the sunday show talking about the decision and what the next steps congress can take in the house was texas republican tony gonzales. asked abou the decision, possible reaction, here is his statement. [video clip] >> i have six children and i am a prolific pro-lifer and it is important that we protect the sanctity of right -- life.

in texas, we have a heartbeat bill that was fast and it is important that states dictate their features and we have to have courts uphold these. it is dangerous, we have the biden administration coming out and saying they may not uphold a rolling as an appropriator on the house republican side, the house republicans have the power of the purse and if the administration wants to not live up to this ruling we will have, a problem and it may become a point where house republicans have to defund fda programs that do not make sense. host: tony gonzalez, texas republican yterday -- sunday, commting on the decision. this is mike on the oppose line. caller: how are you doing?

host: i am fine. go ahead. caller: i oppose this -- the judge's decision and i am christian. i serve a god that said, he gives you the right to choose and he wants you to choose and not to be forced choose and he judges us by our heart and actions. you cannot force someone el into heaven. second -- host: for the judges --judge's decision specifically, why do you oppose it? caller: i oppose it because it is based on the premise of religious beliefs -- and one of your caller said before, the judge said unborn child. d has been debated at which point life begins -- it has been debated at which point light begins. as far as i remember, there is a

separation of church and state. we have to be willing to accept eryone's idea when making the law and not force are on on everyone else. host: as far as the judge's reaction, where did y -- where did you gather religious belief from that? caller: certain trier words. certain issues witthe pro-life movement that is religiously based and based more on stronger beliefs, that life begins with concepti. i don't think -- i don't -- i ow one of your caller said the abortion pl. i thinthat will come up to debate by certain pro-life movement people. host: that is miken laur, maryland calling on the oppose line end of the person who opposed, giovanni in marietta,

georgia. you are next up. caller: good morning. i want to opse the women on the abortion pill. [indiscernible] that's all i have to s. host: you thought the judge overstepped its boundaries -- is boundaries regarding the decision of a approval process? caller: yes. i'm not really sure. can you very -- hear me? host: we got you.

editorials taking a look at the decision and visit from the wall street journal. the law and the abortion pill case and you can find it online at wsj.com. he writean legal issue -- is a question on whethethe fda acted arbitrarily and capriciously under the administration procedure a. we disagree with the judge's decision in part because the the judgment doesn't appear to have been unreasonable. the editors write, the judge legal -- of thabortion drugs risk and benefits and congress has got -- delegated technical questions to regulatory agencies and it is not the role of judges to redo a agency analysis. that editors write this, our disagreement with judge

kacsmaryk's concerns about sepation of power. if hired court overruled kacsmaryk's appeal, that will likely be the reason. that is the wall street journal and if you want to read thei thoughts on the matter this morning, you can continue to calln on your opinion. (202) 748-8000 if you support the texas judge decision, (202) 748-8001 if you oppose it, (202) 748-8002orexas resents. let's hear from bernie, in albany -- new albany, ohio. he supports the decision. caller: my bible tells me that god knew us in the womb. i think life starts at conception.

that is what my bible tells me. host: why do you support the texas dge's decision specifically? caller: because i think if you are killing a humaneing because life starts at conception and don't start -- it don't start, 10, 15 weeks later. it starts at conception and i think in my opinion, all doctors that do this are murderers. . -- they are supposed to try to save lives, not take lives. host: let's hear from dave in wisconsin on our clothesline -- oppose line. caller: i think the