Biden administration defends abortion pill access at US Supreme Court
Send a link to a friend
[March 26, 2024]
By Andrew Chung
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday is poised to
consider whether to restrict access to the abortion pill as President
Joe Biden's administration fights to maintain broad access to the
medication in a major case that thrusts reproductive rights back on the
agenda of the justices in a presidential election year.
Arguments are set for 10 a.m. ET (1400 GMT) in the Biden
administration's appeal of a lower court's ruling that would limit how
the medication, called mifepristone, is prescribed and distributed. Four
medical associations and four doctors who oppose abortion brought the
challenge to mifepristone in Texas.
The Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) regulatory changes at risk in
the case include allowing for medication abortions at up to 10 weeks of
pregnancy instead of seven, and for mail delivery of the drug without a
woman first seeing a clinician in-person.
The Supreme Court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, in 2022
overturned its 1973 Roe v. Wade precedent that had recognized a
constitutional right to abortion, prompting numerous states to enact
Republican-backed measures banning or sharply restricting the procedure.
Since then, medication abortion has become the most common method of
ending pregnancies in the United States, now accounting for more than
60% of abortions.
![](http://archives.lincolndailynews.com/2024/Mar/26/images/ads/current/elkhartfertilizer_sda_SFARM_2024.png)
The justices are reviewing an August decision by the New Orleans-based
5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that faulted the FDA's decisions in
2016 and 2021 to ease access to mifepristone. The case could put at risk
the regulatory authority of the FDA over drug safety.
Mifepristone is taken with another drug called misoprostol to perform
medication abortions.
The FDA gave mifepristone regulatory approval in 2000. It has said that
after decades of use by millions of women in the United States and
around the world, mifepristone has proven "extremely safe," and that
"study after study" has shown that "serious adverse events are
exceedingly rare."
The plaintiffs, led by the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, contend
that the FDA acted contrary to its mandate to ensure medications are
safe in easing the restrictions on mifepristone, violating a federal law
governing the actions of regulatory agencies.
[to top of second column]
|
![](../images/032624PIX/news_a60.jpg)
A container holding boxes of Mifepristone, the first medication in a
medical abortion, are prepared for patients at Alamo Women's Clinic
in Carbondale, Illinois, U.S., April 20, 2023. REUTERS/Evelyn
Hockstein/File Photo
![](http://archives.lincolndailynews.com/2017/Jul/22/images/ads/current/rohlfs_lda_072017.png)
The justices are also tasked with determining whether the plaintiffs
had the proper legal standing to bring the litigation, which
requires that they show that they have been harmed in a way that can
be traced to the FDA.
The plaintiffs have said their member doctors will be forced to
violate their consciences because they will "often be called upon to
treat abortion-drug complications" in emergency settings due to what
they call the FDA's unlawful actions.
The Justice Department has said these claimed harms rely on an
impermissibly speculative chain of events - that other doctors would
provide mifepristone to women who then experience a rare emergency
and end up in the medical care of these plaintiffs. Nor can the
plaintiffs who chose to practice emergency medicine claim to be
injured "whenever they are presented with patients in need of care,"
it added.
Biden, seeking a second term in office in the Nov. 5 U.S. election,
is an outspoken advocate for abortion rights. He and his fellow
Democrats have sought to make abortion rights a central theme
against Republicans ahead of the election.
The plaintiffs in 2022 challenged the FDA's actions approving and
widening access to mifepristone. Texas-based U.S. District Judge
Matthew Kacsmaryk broadly sided with them in a 2023 decision that
would have effectively pulled the drug off the market, though the
5th Circuit's decision did not go that far.
The 5th Circuit's ruling remains on hold pending the Supreme Court's
review. A ruling is expected by the end of June.
(Reporting by Andrew Chung; Editing by Will Dunham)
[© 2024 Thomson Reuters. All rights reserved.]This material
may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content.
![](http://archives.lincolndailynews.com/2024/Mar/26/images/ads/current/applegate_sda_SFARM_2024.png) |