Good morning. Welcome to Axios today. It's Monday, April 10th, and I'm Margaret

Talif in for Nyla Budu. Here's what you need to know today. Housing politics

divides the suburbs, plus the master's wraps up without Tiger Woods. But first

abortion rights may be on the fast track to the US Supreme Court. Again, that's

today's one big thing. If you thought the Supreme Court was done with abortion,

two major rulings might thrust the debate back to the highest court in the

land less than a year after Roe vs Wade was struck down. Orianna Gonzalez is

following this next phase of the abortion fight. Orianna, thanks for joining us.

Thanks for having me, Margaret. There were two major rulings on abortion on

Friday that seemed to contradict one another, one in Texas and the other in

Washington state. What happened? So the Texas ruling comes from a conservative

judge known as Matthew Gicks-Marick. He's a Trump appointee. In his ruling, he

specifically says that he is staying or putting on hold the FDA's approval of

mythopristone, which is a commonly used abortion pill. On the other hand, we have a

judge in Washington, another federal judge, Thomas Rice, who is telling the FDA

that it cannot suspend its approval of mythopristone, and it actually cited

with an argument from the plaintiffs in that case saying that if the approval of

mythopristone were to go away, it would alter the status quo. So both of those

federal rulings cannot exist in perpetuity at the same time. Is that why

everyone thinks this is going to eventually end up back at the Supreme Court?

Exactly. So these are two mutually exclusive conflicting rulings, and so it

makes it almost inevitable that the Supreme Court is going to have a final say on

...