Supreme Court appears skeptical in abortion pill case. Do you agree?
A majority of the U.S. Supreme Court justices on Tuesday questioned whether anti-abortion plaintiffs had the right to challenge the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the abortion pill mifepristone.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday appeared skeptical of a legal challenge by anti-abortion doctors and organizations to limit access to the abortion medication mifepristone, and questioned whether the plaintiffs in the case had the legal right to file suit at all.
In a nearly 90-minute hearing of arguments, the Supreme Court appeared to side with the Food and Drug Administration in the case FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, and raised questions about whether the plaintiffs had the legal right to challenge the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the pill.
Mifepristone was approved by the FDA in 2000 as part of a two-drug regimen for medication abortions, and was used in nearly two-thirds of all abortions in the U.S. last year. In 2016 and 2021, the FDA took steps to make mifepristone more accessible by allowing it to be taken later into a pregnancy and to be delivered through the mail without an in-person doctor’s visit.
The anti-abortion plaintiffs in the case challenged those changes in 2022, claiming the FDA violated the law by failing to adequately evaluate the drug’s safety risks. The coalition brought the challenge in Amarillo, Texas where a single federal judge, Matthew J. Kacsmaryk, heard all new civil cases. Kacsmaryk is a Trump appointee and is openly opposed to abortion.
Last April, Judge Kacsmaryk issued a preliminary ruling aiming to suspend the FDA’s approval of mifepristone and taking the pill off the market. The Biden administration asked the Supreme Court to intervene when an appeals court determined in August that mifepristone should remain legal but placed significant restrictions on access.
During the hearing, the justices focused on the plaintiff’s legal standing, or right to sue, rather than whether the FDA’s approval of the drug was unlawful.
In Tuesday’s hearing, the justices questioned whether the plaintiffs could demonstrate concrete harm if the pill remains widely available, and whether those alleged injuries could be traced to the FDA’s easing of the rules around the pill.
If the court decides that the doctors do not have legal standing to sue, it could order the case be dismissed without deciding whether the FDA acted lawfully when it relaxed the requirements for obtaining mifepristone.
Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar argued the plaintiffs don’t have the legal right to sue because “they don’t prescribe mifepristone. They don’t take mifepristone,” the Washington Post reported. Therefore, Prelogar argued that the doctors “stand at a far distance from the upstream regulatory action they’re challenging.”
The plaintiffs, represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative Christian legal group, argue that the FDA failed to adequately evaluate mifepristone safety risks and say they object to treating women who have taken abortion pills. Doctors can already opt out of providing care that they morally object to under federal conscience protections.
The Supreme Court is expected to issue a decision on the abortion pill case in June.
Do you think the anti-abortion plaintiffs had the legal right to challenge the FDA’s approval of mifepristone?
What do you make of the SCOTUS’ inclination to side with the FDA? Do you share the court’s skepticism of limiting access to abortion medication?
Tell us by filling out the form or e-mailing us at [email protected], and your response may appear in a future Boston.com article.
Be civil. Be kind.
Read our full community guidelines.