WASHINGTON — In a blow to anti-abortion advocates, the Supreme Court on Thursday rejected a challenge to the abortion pill mifepristone, meaning the commonly used drug can remain widely available.
The court found unanimously that the group of anti-abortion doctors who challenged Food and Drug Administration decisions facilitating access to the pill did not have legal standing to sue.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh, writing for the court, wrote that although the plaintiffs have “sincere legal, moral, ideological, and political objections to elective abortion and the FDA’s relaxed regulation of mifepristone,” that does not mean they have a federal case.
The plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate that they suffered any injury, which means that “federal courts are the wrong forum to address plaintiffs’ concerns about the FDA’s actions,” he added.
“Plaintiffs may raise their concerns and objections to the President and the FDA in the regulatory process or to Congress and the President in the legislative process,” Kavanaugh wrote. “And they can also express their opinions about abortion and mifepristone to their fellow citizens, including in political and electoral processes.”
The legal challenge was filed by doctors and other medical professionals represented by the conservative Christian legal group Alliance Defending Freedom.
“We are disappointed that the Supreme Court did not reach the merits of the FDA’s unlawful removal of common-sense safety standards for abortion medications,” said Erin Hawley, one of the group’s attorneys. She told reporters she is hopeful the underlying lawsuit can continue because three states — Idaho, Missouri and Kansas — have filed their own claims and have different arguments to defend themselves.
By dismissing the case on these grounds, the court avoided reaching a decision on the legal merits of whether the FDA acted lawfully in lifting several restrictions, including one that made the drug obtainable by mail, meaning the same issues could still return. to court in another case.
Another upheld regulatory decision means women can still get the pill within 10 weeks of pregnancy, rather than seven.
Likewise, the decision to allow healthcare providers other than doctors to distribute the pill will remain in effect.
The ruling comes two years after the court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, overturned the landmark Roe v. Wade abortion rights ruling. Wade, which led to a wave of new abortion restrictions in conservative states.
The court later suggested it was withdrawing from the political debate over abortion, but with litigation continuing to escalate over abortion access, judges continue to play a key role.
Abortion rights advocates welcomed the ruling, with Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights, saying she was relieved by the outcome but angered that the case had languished in the court system for so long.
“Thank God the Supreme Court rejected this unwarranted attempt to restrict access to medical abortion, but the fact remains that this meritless case should never have gone this far,” she said in a statement.
Danco Laboratories, the maker of Mifeprex, the commercial version of mifepristone, also praised the decision, saying it was good for the drug’s approval process overall.
In rejecting the challenge, the court “upheld the stability of the FDA’s drug approval process, which is based on the agency’s experience and which U.S. patients, health care providers, and the pharmaceutical industry trust,” the court said. company spokeswoman Abigail Long.
Anti-abortion groups expressed disappointment, saying the decision highlighted the importance of this year’s elections, in which Democratic President Joe Biden, who has pledged to defend abortion rights, faces Republican Donald Trump, who has the strong support of conservatives who are oppose abortion. .
“Joe Biden and Democrats are determined to force abortion on demand at any time and for any reason, including DIY mail-order abortions, in every state across the country,” said Marjorie Dannenfeiser, president of SBA Pro-Life America.
If Trump were to win the election, his FDA appointees would be in a position to impose new restrictions on mifepristone.
The dispute over mifepristone is not the only abortion case currently before the court. It must also decide whether Idaho’s strict abortion ban prevents doctors in emergency rooms from performing abortions when a pregnant woman faces dangerous complications.
Mifepristone is used as part of an FDA-approved two-drug regimen that is now the most common form of abortion in the United States.
Abortion is completely banned in 14 states, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research group that supports abortion rights.
The FDA had the support of the pharmaceutical industry, which warned that any doubts about the approval process by untrained federal judges could cause chaos and impede innovation.
Last year, Texas-based U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk issued a sweeping ruling that completely invalidated the FDA’s approval of the pill, leading to panic among abortion rights activists that it would be banned nationwide. .
The Supreme Court last April stayed that ruling, meaning the pill remained widely available while the litigation continued.
In August, the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals restricted Kacsmaryk’s ruling but upheld its conclusion that the FDA’s action to lift the restrictions starting in 2016 was illegal.
Both sides appealed to the Supreme Court. The court in December accepted the Biden administration’s appeal defending the FDA’s later decisions, but chose not to hear the challenge to mifepristone’s original approval in 2000.
The Supreme Court focused exclusively on the FDA’s subsequent action, including the initial 2021 decision making the drug available by mail, which was finalized last year.
This story originally appeared on NBCNews.com read the full story
