Supreme Court Issues Emergency Ruling – TRUMP WINS!
The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously rejected a challenge to the FDA's authority to regulate abortion medications.
The justices ruled 9-0 that the challengers did not have standing to dispute the FDA’s approval process for mifepristone, marking a victory for the Biden administration and abortion rights supporters.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who wrote the opinion, stated, “Under Article III of the Constitution, a plaintiff’s desire to make a drug less available for others does not establish standing to sue. Nor do the plaintiffs’ other standing theories suffice.”
He noted, “The plaintiffs have sincere legal, moral, ideological, and policy objections to elective abortion and to FDA’s relaxed regulation of mifepristone. But under Article III of the Constitution, those kinds of objections alone do not establish a justiciable case or controversy in federal court.”
The justices sent the case back to the Fifth Circuit in line with their decision.
The case stemmed from lawsuits by healthcare groups, including the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, claiming that the drug poses significant risks.
Erin Hawley, an attorney for the Alliance Defending Freedom, which argued against the FDA, said, “We are disappointed that the Supreme Court did not reach the merits of the FDA’s lawless removal of commonsense safety standards for abortion drugs.”
She added, “Nothing in today’s decision changes the fact that the FDA’s own label indicates that roughly one in 25 women who take chemical abortion drugs will end up in the emergency room—a dangerous reality the doctors and medical associations we represent know all too well. The FDA recklessly allows women and girls to take these high-risk drugs at home, without requiring ongoing, in-person medical care.”
“While we’re disappointed with the court’s decision, we will continue to advocate for women and work to restore commonsense safeguards for abortion drugs—like an initial office visit to screen for ectopic pregnancies. We appreciate that three states are prepared to hold the FDA accountable for jeopardizing the health and safety of women and girls across this country,” she continued.
The justices concluded that the group failed to show that the FDA’s regulatory environment was causing them harm, thus denying them standing to pursue the claim.
Kavanaugh explained, “Here, the plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate that FDA’s relaxed regulatory requirements likely would cause them to suffer an injury in fact. For that reason, the federal courts are the wrong forum for addressing the plaintiffs’ concerns about FDA’s actions.”
He added, “The plaintiffs may present their concerns and objections to the President and FDA in the regulatory process, or to Congress and the President in the legislative process. They may also express their views about abortion and mifepristone to fellow citizens, including in the political and electoral processes.”
The court heard nearly 90 minutes of arguments in March regarding federal policies that have facilitated access to mifepristone since 2016, including postal access.
Following the Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization in June 2022, which overturned Roe v. Wade, it was determined that the U.S. Constitution does not guarantee the right to an abortion, leaving the matter to the states.
In the aftermath, 14 states have banned abortion at all stages of pregnancy, with some exceptions, while two others have banned it once a fetal heartbeat is detected, around six weeks into gestation.
Mifepristone and misoprostol are used together to induce medical abortions, commonly referred to as the “abortion pill.”