Last week we received the disappointing news that the US Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the coalition of pro-life doctors challenging the FDA’s approval of the abortion pill Mifepristone did not have standing to bring the case before the court, dismissing the suit.
The case centered around whether the FDA’s approval of Mifepristone passed the “arbitrary and capricious” test which “requires that agency action be reasonable and reasonably explained.”
The FDA initially approved the abortion drug in 2000, despite a significant lack of evidence and clinical trials to ensure it was safe, and they continued to deregulate the dangerous drug in 2016 and 2021, first allowing healthcare providers who are not physicians to prescribe the drug, then allowing it to be prescribed over video call and sent in the mail. The FDA ignored numerous safety concerns to increase access to mifepristone at the behest of Planned Parenthood, putting countless women in danger.
The Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine (AHM) argued that the FDA acted unlawfully and irresponsibly in 2016 and 2021 when they continued to deregulate a drug that had well-documented safety concerns. In turn, the FDA argued that AHM did not have standing to bring the case in front of the court because doctors no longer prescribe mifepristone and thus are not “regulated in any relevant way under FDA’s decisions” and “stand at a far distance from the upstream regulatory action they are challenging.”
The Supreme Court Justices agreed with the FDA’s challenge of AHM’s standing, and dismissed the case. However, the judges never weighed in on whether or not the FDA passed the “arbitrary and capricious” test in their swift approval of the drug. This means hope is not lost for the pro-life cause – another case arguing these very same principles can still be brought before the court if an individual or group can prove they have been harmed by the FDA’s approval of Mifepristone. Click here to read an amicus curiae brief submitted by a coalition of family policy councils, including Family Voice, in support of AHM detailing why the Supreme Court should ban the abortion pill. These points will remain relevant in any challenge related to the safety of Mifepristone.
“While we understand the proper role of standing doctrine under our Constitution, we are troubled by this outcome, and we remain determined to continue to protect women and children from this dangerous drug,” Family Research Council president Tony Perkins said in a statement. “Every abortion is tragic because it takes the life of an unborn child, but abortions using the mifepristone drug are especially devastating because of the additional risk they pose to the mother. The FDA’s own label admits that 1 in 25 women will visit the ER after the use of this drug. The FDA knew this and still removed the safety regulations that would minimize the physical risks to mothers. This is not the end. The pro-life movement will never stop fighting for moms and their unborn children. We will continue to look toward the day when the FDA is held accountable for its politically motivated reckless endangerment of women and their unborn children.” (emphasis added)
