U.S. Supreme Court appears skeptical of abortion pill access challenge

A U.S. Supreme Court justice on Tuesday appeared to cast doubt on whether anti-abortion groups and doctors seeking to limit the use of the abortion pill have the legal standing needed to pursue the case as President Joe Biden’s administration works to maintain widespread use of the drug.

The justices heard arguments in the Biden administration’s appeal of a lower court ruling that would limit how the drug, called mifepristone, can be prescribed and distributed. Four medical associations and four anti-abortion doctors have challenged mifepristone in Texas. The case puts reproductive rights back on the agenda for judges in a presidential election year.

Regulatory changes at risk from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the case include allowing medical abortions at 10 weeks of pregnancy instead of 7, and allowing women to have abortions by mail without first seeing a clinician in person. drug.

Deputy Attorney General Elizabeth Preloga, defending the government, told the judge that the plaintiffs lacked proper legal standing to raise the challenge and asked the court to “put an end to this case.” Prelogar said the plaintiffs failed to prove where necessary that their injuries could be traced to the FDA.

Preloga said the plaintiffs did not appear “within the 100 miles” required to prove legal injury.
Conservative Justice Samuel Alito, who authored the court’s 2022 ruling overturning Roe v. Wade, the 1973 precedent that recognized a constitutional right to abortion, asked Prelogar to determine who can Sue the FDA.

“Who can sue and get a judicial ruling to prove whether the FDA’s actions were legal?” Alito asked. “Shouldn’t someone be challenging this in court? Who?”

Erin Hawley, an attorney representing the plaintiffs, told some judges during questioning that her clients had the necessary legal standing to file the lawsuit. The plaintiffs say their member doctors will be forced to violate their consciences because of what they call the FDA’s illegal actions, resulting in them being “routinely called upon to treat complications of abortion drugs” in emergencies.
Preloga told the judge the FDA acted legally.

“The agency relied on dozens of studies involving tens of thousands of women. Respondents found no evidence that the agency ignored it. They simply disagreed with the agency’s previous analysis of the data. But this does not provide the Justice Department with the authority to The agency’s expert verdicts are second-guessed,” Preloga said.

The Justice Department said the alleged harms relied on an impermissibly speculative series of events — that other doctors would have provided mifepristone to women who then experienced rare emergencies and ended up receiving medical care from these plaintiffs.

The Supreme Court has a 6-3 conservative majority. After the 2022 abortion ruling, many states enacted Republican-backed measures banning or severely restricting abortion procedures.

Since then, medical abortion has become the most common method of terminating pregnancy in the United States, currently accounting for more than 60% of all abortions. Mifepristone is taken with another drug called misoprostol for medical abortion.

conscientious objection

Liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson asked about the apparent mismatch between the legal harms claimed by the plaintiffs and the relief they sought in the lawsuit, particularly given the exemptions for doctors with conscientious objections to performing abortions and Related procedures.

“They said, ‘Because we object to being forced into this process, we are seeking an order that would prevent anyone from obtaining these drugs,'” Jackson said. “I guess I just want to understand how they qualify for this.”

Jessica Ellsworth, an attorney representing mifepristone maker Danco Laboratories, told the judge that the plaintiffs were taking a position that would upend not just the drug but “the approval of virtually all drugs” and Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) modifications to this drug. FDA for decades.

The justices are reviewing an August ruling by the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that found fault with the FDA’s decisions to ease mifepristone’s access in 2016 and 2021.

The 5th Circuit’s ruling remains on hold pending review by the Supreme Court. A ruling is expected by the end of June.
The FDA granted regulatory approval to mifepristone in 2000. It is said that after decades of use by millions of women in the United States and around the world, mifepristone has been proven to be “extremely safe” and that “study after study” has shown that “serious adverse events are extremely rare.”

The plaintiffs challenged the FDA’s approval and action to expand the use of mifepristone in 2022.

The plaintiffs, led by the Hippocratic Medical Alliance, argue that the FDA violated its duty to ensure drug safety and violated federal laws governing the conduct of regulatory agencies when it relaxed restrictions on mifepristone.

Biden, who is seeking re-election in the November 5 US election, is an outspoken advocate for abortion rights. He and his fellow Democrats sought to make abortion rights a central theme against Republicans ahead of the election.
Hundreds of abortion rights and anti-abortion demonstrators held a raucous rally in front of the courthouse.