This case was more about the scope of federal racketeering law than it was about abortions or abortion rights.

[In the wake of his comments last month that he would not apply an abortion-rights] litmus test ... understands viscerally reproductive rights as being related to women's human rights. ... But he's got to come up with some better language to talk about it.

We really have to be willing to find out who we are instead of rebelling for the equal rights that we've been denied, that we do deserve.

If supporters of RU-486 believe the FDA followed the law in approving RU-486 for abortion, they should have nothing to fear from the proposed review. But if the FDA bent the rules to expedite approval of RU-486, the agency clearly valued the 'health' of the abortion industry over women's health and should be brought to account.

Even though the supporters of this law purported to be banning one particular abortion procedure, the law as the court found would in fact chill doctors from performing virtually any second trimester abortion.

I do not support abortion rights. Although what I would support in this vexed area is not clear to me.