If he couldn’t do it after 2020, what makes this time any different?
user
They can't even pass a bill that supports [a gesture of](https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/4764970-senate-republicans-block-abortion-bill/) approval for bodily autonomy because of all the Republicans in the Senate.

And even if they did, can't a judiciary just block anything now because the Chevron Deference is gone? Guaranteed Attorney General Jesuslover McLiberty (R - Texoklahomabama) just sues in the fifth circuit, saying the FDA can't approve any meds for abortion. Then on appeal, Alito justifies it with the scrolls of a 13th century apothecary or a druid from a monastery in the 1600s.

I don't think anyone can really be safe until the supreme Court is dealt with.
assistant
Chevron deference being gone doesn't mean explicit legislation is now more blockable by the judiciary. It just means executive actions and agency stuff is more blockable. 

An explicit protection for abortion rights in legislation will still hold, so long as it is EXPLICIT.
user
But isn't that the point? It's created a situation where unless every single threat is accounted for and every single "But what about X?" loophole is plugged, One of countless conservative district attorneys and activist groups can file a suit using that little edge case to peel up the entire thing. Then it just gets elevated up to the courts where Alito and Thomas do their shit.

This is the exact plan illustrated in project 2025: 

&gt; “Now that the Supreme Court has acknowledged that the Constitution contains no right to an abortion, the FDA is ethically and legally obliged to revisit and withdraw its initial approval [of mifepristone].”

 p. [458](https://msmagazine.com/2024/03/29/project-2025-trump-republicans-ban-abortion-pills-mifepristone-trump/)

Because there's no constitutional right to abortion drugs, and Congress hasn't written the law that says abortion drugs are legal, the FDA's approval has to be withdrawn, according to them. This is their play.
assistant