The Dispatch: More from CWR...

Will the Supreme Court make a ruling about mail order abortion?

If the Supreme Court declines to take up Food and Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, it will be a victory for the pro-life side in the dispute.

(Gavel image: Wesley Tingey/Unsplash.com; Mifepristone pills: Yuchacz/Wikipedia)

The Supreme Court is expected soon to decide—indeed, may have decided by the time you read this—whether to let stand or review a lower court decision clamping down on mail order abortion. The focal point of the dispute is the widely used abortion drug mifepristone.

Mifepristone is used in more than half of all U.S. abortions. The drug causes abortion by breaking down the lining of a pregnant woman’s uterus.

Seeking review of a 5th U.S. Court decision imposing restrictions on the drug are the Food and Drug Administration, the U.S. Department of Justice and Danco Laboratories, its manufacturer.

A group called the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, made up of pro-life physicians and others, claims the FDA, acting under pressure from the administrations of former president Barack Obama and President Joe Biden, cut corners to make mifepristone more easily available. (The group’s name is a reference to the oath, named for the Greek physician Hippocrates, by which physicians pledge themselves to practice medicine ethically.)

The case (Food and Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine) comes to the Supreme Court on appeal from a ruling last August by a three-judge panel of the 5th Circuit Courts upholding a district court decision that placed substantial restrictions on the drug. The Supreme Court had earlier refused to consider the case until the 5th Circuit Court ruled on it.

If the Supreme Court declines to take up the case, it will be a victory for the pro-life side in the dispute. If it agrees, that will leave the outcome suspended until it hears and decides the case. A minimum of four justices must vote to hear a case for it to be accepted for review.

The FDA first gave its approval to mifepristone in 2000, then in 2016 and 2021 relaxed restrictions on it, allowing its use up to the 10th week of pregnancy—the point at which an unborn infant has a beating heart. The FDA also permitted non-physician health care providers to prescribe the drug, and allowed it to be prescribed and sent through the mail without an in-person examination.

The ruling by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals—which covers Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi—reduces the time frame from 10 weeks to seven, the point at which the fetus begins to feel pain. It bars non-physician prescription of mifepristone and sending it through the mail, and requires three in-person visits by the woman to the prescribing doctor.

A fact sheet on chemical abortion prepared by the Secretariat of Pro-Life Activities of the U.S. Catholic Bishops’ Conference notes that the Food and Drug Administration, when approving chemical abortion in 2000, also issued “strict protocols” for the protection of the mother. The original safeguards were later incorporated into a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy adopted in 2011.

But, the fact sheet says, the safeguards were “severely weakened” in 2016 when the FDA began permitting non-physicians to dispense the drug and reduced the number of office visits required from three to one. Then in 2021, it says, the FDA began allowing mail-order abortion and eliminating “any pretense of” a doctor-patient relationship.. “With this action,” the fact sheet adds, there is no knowing “the full extent of harm to the women whom the FDA is supposed to protect.” Among the potential problems it lists are serious injury and even death resulting from complications like previously undetected ectopic pregnancy, severe blood loss, and other problems.

And all to what end? “In addition to being a profitable new ‘product,’” the USCCB fact sheet says, “telehealth, mail order, at-home, do-it-yourself chemical abortions are a boon to the abortion industry.”


If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!

Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.


About Russell Shaw 293 Articles
Russell Shaw was secretary for public affairs of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops/United States Catholic Conference from 1969 to 1987. He is the author of 20 books, including Nothing to Hide, American Church: The Remarkable Rise, Meteoric Fall, and Uncertain Future of Catholicism in America, Eight Popes and the Crisis of Modernity, and, most recently, The Life of Jesus Christ (Our Sunday Visitor, 2021).

6 Comments

    • Neither Congress, The States, or The Supreme Court has the authority to deny innocent beloved sons and daughters their unalienable Right to Life, because every unalienable Right is endowed to us from God and cannot be relinquished even if we do desire to.

  1. If they are consistent they will pass and make the erroneous argument that abortion is a State’s Right issue even though it is a self evident Truth that human persons can only conceive a human person and from the moment of conception, every son or daughter of a human person can only be, in essence, a human person, thus even though our inherent unalienable Right to Life, the securing and protection upon which our inherent Right to Liberty and The Pursuit Of Happiness depends, is endowed to us by our Creator at the moment we are Created and brought into being, equal in Dignity, while being complementary as a beloved son or daughter, at our conception, The Supreme Court has ruled that The Right to Life is a State’s Right issue and not a Human’s Right issue.
    I

  2. When the Supreme Court issued the Dobbs Decision which overturned Roe, they kicked the issue of abortion back to the States. They said that the Federal Government should not be involved.

    That said, I think that the Court will allow States to prohibit or allow the abortion pill as they deem appropriate. So, blue states will allow and red states prohibit getting the abortion pill.

    This would follow onto the Dobbs Decision. I doubt that the Court will either allow the pill for the whole nation nor prohibit it for the whole nation.

  3. Every now and then it is a good idea to state some obvious facts:

    1) The statement ‘life begins at conception’ is a biological fact as well as a religious fact, in fact one could say that is a biological fact BEFORE it is a religious fact.

    And

    If it’s growing – it’s ALIVE.

  4. fed by the mother in and outside the womb

    being from MI it’s quite depressing the results of the ballot initiatives like here and OH

    we need to immediately center education/alerting on helping women save their babies even if the male does not want to, including paying for any costs of medical and adoption etc etc etc (ideas anyone?)

1 Trackback / Pingback

  1. Will the Supreme Court make a ruling about mail order abortion? – Via Nova

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

All comments posted at Catholic World Report are moderated. While vigorous debate is welcome and encouraged, please note that in the interest of maintaining a civilized and helpful level of discussion, comments containing obscene language or personal attacks—or those that are deemed by the editors to be needlessly combative or inflammatory—will not be published. Thank you.


*