Image by Adobe Stock
In 2022, the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in a landmark decision that allows states the individual ability to determine rules and regulations regarding abortion rights. On March 26, 2024, the battle on abortion rights returned to the Supreme Court, this time with the justices determining the abortion pill’s availability within the US. The FDA has been sued for approving the use of the abortion pill mifepristone twice before. The previous trials regarding this issue took place in Washington State and Texas. The ruling in Washington allowed the continued use of the pill, but the judge in Texas ordered a suspension of mifepristone, bringing the case to the Supreme Court for further judgment.
Mifepristone, the primary drug in question, “blocks progesterone, a hormone needed for a pregnancy to continue” but must be taken with “misoprostol to end a pregnancy.” According to Planned Parenthood, misoprostol can be taken without mifepristone to induce bleeding and end the pregnancy. Misoprostol alone can be taken up to 11 weeks after a woman’s first day of their last period and has a success rate of 85-95%. Misoprostol taken with Mifepristone has a success rate of 87-98%.
Mifepristone was originally banned from the United States in 1989 but was approved for use in 2000. In 2020, people were required to go receive the pill in-person from medical clinics in-person; unfortunately, this presented the risk of potential exposure to COVID-19 and was more harmful to racial minorities. Beginning in July 2020, the in-person requirement was eliminated and patients were able to have the pill mailed to them or picked up from their local pharmacy. As of January 2023, this temporary ruling became official.
The Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine brought forth this issue, advocating for the elimination of abortion pills. The AHM stands against any form of unnatural death, abortion being one of those forms. Their website declares that they “will maintain the utmost respect for human life from the moment of fertilization until the moment of natural death.” Opposing the AHM is the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, standing in support of the abortion pill’s availability. NPR reports that the FDA has the support of almost all major medical associations on their side. They have also argued that the approval of this drug is beyond the FDA’s power to determine what is deemed appropriate for the American people to access, KFF writes.
Leading the AHM in this lawsuit is Erin Hawley, the wife of Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO). Hawley previously worked with the Alliance Defending Freedom to challenge Roe v. Wade and has also served on the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, Yale News reports. Yale News also states that Hawley was “hired by the conservative Christian legal advocacy group” and serves as senior counsel and vice president of the organization. Hawley’s position is viewed as unsurprising given her political ideology as a Republican woman. Some data reveals the demographics of who is pro-choice and who is pro-life; this data shows that, typically, Republican and conservative ideology is pro-life.
If the AHM wins this case, this suggests it would be more than another limitation on abortion access for women. The FDA is responsible for protecting the health of Americans by providing safe and secure medications. If the Supreme Court rules in favor of the AHM, then the power of the FDA will be limited in determining what are safe medications for the American people. That begs the question of who has the power to determine what can be accessible to the American people.
Marsha Henderson, a former FDA associate commissioner for women’s health, told NPR that “if you start putting politics or junk science into the mix…the system will collapse.” Henderson is “a former FDA associate commissioner for women’s health.” Henderson further told NPR that there is “a very clear and scientific approach…there are teams of scientists and researchers that participate…the information, the data evolves, and they collectively help to enhance the whole research world.” Henderson supports the use of the abortion pill, emphasizing that the issue is not about whether the pill has been deemed safe for use. The issue was never about whether or not the pills are safe, though Henderson’s quotes help support the arguments that mifepristone is safe.
Ultimately, this case is one that has already deepened existing polarization over abortion rights as it involves moral arguments as well as scientific ones. Citizens will condemn the judges regardless of what their final ruling is; this is not a simple case that involves facts but also ethics and morals. As NPR notes, “there is more at stake than abortion rights. It’s the entire structure of the FDA’s regulatory power to approve drugs and evaluate their safety.”
Update: On June 13, 2024, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the FDA and their right to approve of Mifepristone.
Comments