The Supreme Court rules mifepristone can remain available – here's how 2 conflicting federal court decisions led to this point
Retrieved on:
Saturday, April 22, 2023
Supreme, Review, Circuit court, White House, Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, Food, DSM-IV codes, Abortion, Matthew J. Kacsmaryk, Federal district, District, Government, Down syndrome, Disagreement, Mifepristone, Supreme court, Law of the United Kingdom, Confusion, Supreme Court of the United States, FDA, United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, Constitution, Birth control
The U.S. Supreme Court issued an emergency ruling on April 21, 2023, that allows continued access to the abortion pill mifepristone in states where abortion is legal.
Key Points:
- The U.S. Supreme Court issued an emergency ruling on April 21, 2023, that allows continued access to the abortion pill mifepristone in states where abortion is legal.
- On April 7, two federal district court judges halfway across the country from each other issued conflicting rulings about the validity of the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of mifepristone.
- Within a week, yet another court issued a third opinion, which allowed mifepristone to continue to be prescribed, but under more limited circumstances.
The federal system
- It’s first useful to understand how the federal court system in the U.S. works.
- State-run court systems are entirely separate from the federal judicial system, which is where the mifepristone rulings are playing out.
- Federal courts handle a variety of issues, including those relating to the United States government, the Constitution or federal laws, or controversies between states or between the U.S. government and foreign governments.
- There are 94 federal district courts, organized into 12 regional circuits.
Other examples
- There are many other examples where federal circuit courts disagree.
- In 2018, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, which serves Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin, ruled that an Indiana state law that banned abortions based on genetic anomalies was not constitutional.
- But in 2021, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld an Ohio law banning abortions based on one kind of genetic anomaly, Down syndrome.
The case of mifepristone
- With this latest example of courts butting heads, Federal District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk in Texas ruled first, on April 7.
- His decision took the form of a preliminary injunction, which is essentially a temporary ruling, until the court has a chance to go through a full trial.
- Kacsmaryk concluded that the FDA had exceeded its authority in approving mifepristone in 2000 and in loosening the prescribing restrictions over the years.
Where the issues stand
- But that decision is only in effect while the case is being decided by the 5th Circuit.
- And the situation gets even more complicated, with a third lawsuit filed in a federal court in Maryland on April 19.
- That case was brought by GenBioPro, the manufacturer of a generic version of mifepristone, which the FDA approved in 2019.