When the Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade nearly two years ago, it declared that abortion rules were now up to each state, but this week the justices are considering a landmark case regarding the pill mifepristone. -Lights is once again in serious trouble. their hands. The good news is that this isn't difficult.
A two-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has issued a ruling that imposes significant restrictions on health care providers who prescribe mifepristone, the first part of a two-drug therapy used in many medical institutions. As a result, the court agreed to hear FDA v. Hippocrates Medical Alliance. More than half of all abortions in the United States. It doesn't really matter whether patients have access to mifepristone. The court agreed that challenges to the FDA's 2000 approval of the drug are time-barred. But when and how this can be done remains a challenge. The 5th Circuit struck down changes made over the past eight years that made it easier for women to obtain mifepristone, such as later in pregnancy or by mail or other means. There is no need to make three separate visits to a medical facility.
Will the Supreme Court now side with the Fifth Circuit justices on a subject about which judges generally know little and doctors and scientists much? Or will it side with the FDA's doctors and scientists? You need to consider whether you want to take sides. But before the justices reach that argument, something else must be resolved. Do the litigants in this case even have standing, or the legal right to sue? Solving this question is easier than you think.
For the Hippocratic Medical Alliance to establish itself, it must show that there is current or imminent harm caused by the widespread availability of mifepristone. However, as emergency room doctors, they do not use or prescribe mifepristone. So they settled on claiming hypothetical injuries. If unspecified members of the group had to treat patients who had taken mifepristone, they could be at risk of harm. For doctors sworn to care for people in need, treating people who suffer from the side effects of officially prescribed drugs shouldn't do much harm.
The supposed injuries claimed by the Hippocratic Medical Union are even more questionable considering that complications from mifepristone are extremely rare. For the same reason, even if the Supreme Court decides that the plaintiffs have standing to challenge the FDA, their case is weak. The Fifth Circuit agreed in part with U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmalik's opinion, saying the FDA violated important safety measures when it relaxed regulations for mifepristone. The FDA said it was just updating the approved terms of use for a drug that has been considered safe and effective for millions of patients for nearly a quarter of a century.
Editorial board opinions that follow this author
Naturally, science is on the side of scientists. Study after study has shown that less than 1 percent of mifepristone patients require hospitalization. The FDA has received reports of 28 deaths out of 5.6 million people who took the drug from its approval in 2000 to last summer, but even those deaths cannot be confidently attributed to the drug. I can not say. Other countries around the world have engaged in similarly rigorous studies and have come to the same conclusions. At least 94 countries have approved the pill, and a growing number are adding it to their list of essential medicines.
In fact, patients seeking abortion are at greater risk without mifepristone than with it. It is possible to terminate the pregnancy with misoprostol, the usual combination medication for mifepristone, but it causes more cramping and bleeding. Meanwhile, the risk of serious complications from childbirth remains at about 1.4%, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Compare the methodology underlying these conclusions, carefully and over time established by the international community, with the methodology relied upon by Judge Kacmarik in the decision reviewed by the Fifth Circuit. Much of his data comes from anti-abortion groups whose very mission is to undermine abortion. FDA Policy. To prove that “chemical abortion” causes “negative changes” in patients, he cited a study that relied on — yes, really — a collection of anonymous blog posts from abortionchangesyou.org .
Less than two years ago, the Supreme Court ruled that courts rarely interfere with democratically determined abortion rules. Currently, the country's judges are being asked to decide whether a court should overturn an administrative agency's scientific judgment and, in doing so, prevent patients from accessing mifepristone regardless of state laws. It will limit your abilities. The answer should be obvious.
