(Molly Bruns, Headline USA) New Jersey’s Democrat Gov. Phil Murphy announced that his state would continue to allow doctors to prescribe the abortifacient drug mifepristone, possibly in defiance of an upcoming Supreme Court ruling on the matter.
During an appearance Wednesday on MSNBC’s Katy Tur Reports, Murphy insisted that a ruling against widespread access to the drug may “cost people’s lives, women in particular, sadly. And so, if that’s what’s at stake, we’ll do whatever it takes to save lives.”
According to Breitbart, Tur questioned what he, as a state-level official, could do against the Supreme Court.
“We’ve gone to the CEOs of both Walgreens and CVS to make sure that we had unencumbered access,” Murphy explained.
“We have considered a bulk acquisition,” he continued. “We have clearly joined in legal action as an amicus matter.”
Murphy suggested he would stop at nothing to make sure women have unfettered access to kill their children in the state of New Jersey.
“Everything is on the table—and please, God, it doesn’t come to that, but we will continue to fight it like heck,” he said.
Murphy also shared a personal anecdote about his own children, lamenting that, according to the current heartbeat laws supported by many red states, he would have been denied the opportunity to abort them.
“By the way, at six weeks, my wife and I don’t think that we knew we were pregnant with any of our four kids at six weeks—so, people need to understand that,” he said.
“But this is going to cost people’s lives,” Murphy added. “Its going to cost them health. It’s also going to cost people’s lives, women in particular, sadly.”
The Supreme Court recently put on hold a lower-court ruling that would implement a ban on the abortion pills as Democrats attempted to find a way to grant customers wholesale access to the drug, including by mail.
Justice Samuel Alito wrote an opinion staying the decision and slamming the FDA for their shoddy work in approving the drug, which was revealed to cause serious health issues for women, in addition to killing their unborn babies, in multiple studies.
“At present, the applicants are not entitled to a stay because they have not shown that they are likely to suffer irreparable harm in the interim,” Alito wrote.
“Our granting of a stay of a lower-court decision is an equitable remedy,” he continued. “It should not be given if the moving party has not acted equitably, and that is the situation here.”