Supreme Court questions attorneys on regulation of abortion drug

Update (1 p.m.): U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar argued that the Food and Drug Administration properly eliminated safety measures around mifepristone. She added that the pro-life doctors of the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine did not have standing to sue because federal law does not force doctors to prescribe abortion drugs against their consciences. She acknowledged that the number of women visiting the emergency room after taking mifepristone had increased since the regulations around the drug changed. The FDA in 2021 had removed the requirement for an in-person visit to obtain mifepristone. Prelogar insisted that more ER trips did not necessarily mean more complications.

Jessica Ellsworth, an attorney for Danco Laboratories, the company that produces the mifepristone drug Mifeprex, also argued that the pro-life doctors did not have standing to sue.

What did the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine have to say? Erin Hawley of the Alliance Defending Freedom argued that doctors from the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine still face the possibility of participating in an abortion under current federal law. She argued that the lower court rulings that blocked the FDA’s reduction of rules for the drug were appropriate remedies for her clients. The lower court rulings could keep all pro-life doctors from having to deal with complications from the drug’s use, she said. 

Earlier report (10 a.m.): Justices heard oral arguments on Tuesday about the legality of the Food and Drug Administration reducing safety rules around access to the abortion drug mifepristone.

How did this come about? A group of pro-life doctors, the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, argues the FDA did not follow the proper procedures in reducing its safety measures in 2016 and again in 2021. The FDA originally approved mifepristone for use, and the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine also challenged that initial approval, although that part of the group’s challenge did not make its way to the Supreme Court.

Dig deeper: Read Leah Savas’ report in Vitals about how the Supreme Court’s decision in this case could reinforce states’ rights.