US Supreme Court Upholds Access to Abortion Pill but Closer Look at Ruling Disappoints

Photo: Steve Chan, ProBonoPhoto.

The Supreme Court of the United States voted unanimously to toss out the right-wing challenge to FDA authorization of the abortion pill mifepristone. It's a victory, certainly-- but is it a legitimate, lasting victory?

By leaving the existing FDA rules in place without directly addressing the regulations themselves, SCOTUS left the door open to continued challenges by right wing groups, including the plaintiff in this case, the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine. The right wing is attacking IVF and hormonal contraception. They are using every avenue possible to impose their agenda on working class folks.

Mary Ziegler, a professor at UC Davis School of Law whose research specializes in U.S. abortion law, explained in an article in Politico, “It just kicks the can down the road. The court didn’t say anything to suggest any skepticism of the plaintiffs’ claims on the merits. So these states could be back with virtually identical claims before the Supreme Court in a year or a year-and-a-half.”

Indeed, anti-abortion group Alliance Defending Freedom said they expect litigation to continue adding that “We’re hopeful that the FDA will be held to account."

Jessica Valenti who publishes “Abortion Everyday” takes corporate media to task. She says that by reporting that the Court ruled in favor of abortion rights or that the ruling preserved access to mifepristone, reporters are giving Americans the impression that the availability of the medication is safe. She writes: "The truth is that the ruling wasn’t really 'in favor' of anything related to abortion; it was about standing and who has the right to challenge the FDA’s rules on medication. That’s why anti-abortion activists and groups aren’t more upset, and why they’re moving straight ahead with their other plans.”

The Supreme Court held that the doctors who brought the lawsuit didn’t have standing because they were not directly impacted by the FDA policies they were challenging. So while the ruling was initially celebrated, the battle for reproductive justice must continue.