USA News Hub

Abortion rights supporters already won a partial victory in this case when the Supreme Court agreed to hear it last December. The justices agreed to review part of the ruling that dealt with the post-2016 rules. But they declined to review the Fifth Circuit’s decision that left the 2000 approval intact. That meant, legally speaking, that any ruling the justices deliver in this case could only turn back the clock on mifepristone to 2016 at most, when the first of the recent rule changes went into effect.

Even prevailing on those grounds would still be a significant victory for anti-abortion activists, however. Mifepristone is the most widely used abortion drug in the nation, and medically induced abortions account for between 30 and 40 percent of abortions in the country. The new rules, promulgated in 2016 and 2021, allow the drug to be administered slightly later in pregnancy and eliminate a requirement for three in-person doctor visits before it can be prescribed.

Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote the court’s ruling to overturn Roe v. Wade two years ago, seemed eager to find a way to challenge the FDA’s rule changes. At times he seemed to be brainstorming about what a better plaintiff, with better standing, might look like. “Is there anybody who could challenge in court the lawfulness of what the FDA did here?” he asked Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, who represented the federal government. “In this particular case, I think the answer is no,” she replied. “Well, that wasn’t my question,” he continued. “Is there anybody who can do that?”