US Supreme Court weighs restrictions on widely used abortion pill
US Supreme Court convenes on limits placed on mifepristone, commonly used abortion medication, in legal battle that could significantly impact reproductive rights in the US
The US Supreme Court met on Tuesday to discuss limits placed on the commonly used abortion medication, mifepristone, in a potentially consequential legal struggle that might have a major influence on reproductive rights in the United States.
Protesters gathered outside the courthouse in downtown Washington, DC, to voice support or opposition to the proposed legislation as the nine justices began their oral arguments.
Elizabeth Prelogar, the US Solicitor General, vehemently objected to the restrictions, claiming that there was no need to stop the medication’s availability. Mifepristone has long been used to end pregnancies; it was approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2000.
Prelogar raised worries about the possible repercussions of restricting access, emphasizing the possibility that women might be forced to have more invasive surgeries or, in some situations, be completely denied access to the medication.
A conservative US District Court judge in Texas appointed by Republican President Donald Trump last year made an order that attempted to outlaw the use of mifepristone, which is the source of the current legal conflict. Restrictions were placed on the medicine even though a conservative-dominated appellate court overturned the whole prohibition because the statute of limitations had run out for contesting FDA clearance.
The Supreme Court has heard an appeal of the lower court’s rulings by Danco Laboratories, the maker of mifepristone, and the Democratic administration of Joe Biden.
In the middle of all of this legal wrangling, the conservative-majority U.S. Supreme Court has ordered a temporary suspension of the lower court’s decisions, so keeping mifepristone available in the meantime.
The use of mifepristone during pregnancy was first authorized for up to seven weeks in 2000. However, in 2016, the laws were loosened, allowing for a 10-week duration of use. The COVID-19 pandemic led to other adjustments like as the removal of the need for in-person dispensing in 2021, which allowed for postal distribution and remote prescription delivery.
Nonetheless, the ruling by the appeals court raises the possibility of going back to previous limitations, such as limiting the amount of time that may be used, banning postal distribution, and requiring doctor-prescribed administration.
Amidst the growing use of pharmaceutical abortions in the US, there is legal squabbling about reproductive rights. 63 percent of all abortions in the US last year were pharmaceutical abortions, according to the Guttmacher Institute. This is a significant increase from the year before.
The Director of Federal Policy at Guttmacher, Amy Friedrich-Karnik, issued a warning against bringing back antiquated regulations, claiming that doing so would severely limit access to abortion services throughout the country.
In the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, abortion has become a divisive subject, and opinions among the people are still mixed. Polls regularly show that the majority of people favor preserving access to safe abortion procedures, despite conservative attempts to restrict or outlaw abortion rights.
Before the forthcoming presidential election, in which abortion is expected to be a major point of debate, the Supreme Court is expected to make a ruling on the mifepristone case by the end of June.
Source: AFP
