Revisiting abortion by mail

Editor's note: The following text is a transcript of a podcast story. To listen to the story, click on the arrow beneath the headline above.

NICK EICHER, HOST: Up next, the U.S. Supreme Court extended a stay yesterday that allows mail orders of the abortion drug, mifepristone. The Court will take up to three more days to consider a lower court order that would have brought back a requirement the drug be dispensed in person.

LINDSAY MAST, HOST: Pro-lifers hope the justices will agree that the Food and Drug Administration’s current policy is dangerous and unlawful. 

WORLD’s Lauren Canterberry has the story.

LAUREN CANTERBERRY: The U.S. Supreme Court now has until Thursday to consider whether abortionists should be allowed to mail mifepristone while a case challenging the policy proceeds.

The state of Louisiana and a woman named Rosalie Markizech, are suing the FDA over its 2021 decision to let women order the drug without ever seeing a medical provider in person.

Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Erik Baptist is defending the plaintiffs. He says the Biden administration intentionally loosened protections ahead of the Dobbs decision.

BAPTIST: Women are being coerced, they’re being tricked and slipped these drugs through what the Biden administration allowed. And the states, such as Louisiana, who have robust pro-life laws, are not able to really fulfill that promise of Dobbs.

For its part, the FDA earlier this year asked a Louisiana district court to pause the case while it conducted a long-promised safety review of mifepristone. The court agreed on the condition that the agency provide a progress report later this year.

On May 1, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals temporarily reinstated the nationwide in-person dispensing requirement. The panel of judges said the plaintiffs had shown that they were suffering harm under the current policy.

BAPTIST: The FDA, in its own words, says it lacks sufficient scientific studies to show the safety of mail-order abortion drugs. When an agency says it lacks the scientific basis for its decision, that’s unlawful.

After the drugmakers submitted emergency requests to the Supreme Court last Saturday, Justice Samuel Alito granted a one-week stay to give the court time to deliberate.

Yesterday, he extended that stay until five o-clock Thursday.

While the ADF submitted a brief last week supporting their plaintiffs, the FDA did not file a brief backing its policy. 

President of Students for Life Kristan Hawkins sees that as a good sign, but she said the Trump administration needs to do more to support pro-life causes.

HAWKINS: There’s been very reasonable concerns that have been expressed from conservatives across the country as to why the Trump FDA and DOJ is allowing this wild, wild west of abortion policy to continue forward.

Some of those concerns have centered on FDA Commissioner Marty Makary. Senator Josh Hawley has criticized Makary, arguing the FDA has slow-rolled Mifepristone’s safety review. Makary’s future with the agency became less clear last week, after reports that the President intends to fire him for reasons unrelated to the abortion drug.

Meanwhile, pro-lifers and pro-abortion groups are watching the nation’s highest court to see if the justices will protect babies from chemical abortions, or allow the drugs to continue to be shipped for now.

HAWKINS: Regardless of how the Supreme Court rules on this stay, we know that we still have to await the Fifth Circuit to hear the case, hear the case, and decide. Every day that this stay holds on, babies will die.

Reporting for WORLD, I’m Lauren Canterberry.

WORLD Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of WORLD Radio programming is the audio record.