Americans will still be able to buy an abortion pill after the US Supreme Court threw out a bid by campaign groups to restrict access to it.
The decision was made by the same court that two years ago overturned Roe v Wade – which had previously given womenrights to terminate a pregnancy.
The drug – mifepristone – was first approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in September 2000 for medical termination up to seven weeks into pregnancy, extended to 10 weeks in 2016.
It was ruled the plaintiffs behind the lawsuit challenging mifepristone lacked the necessary legal standing to pursue the case, which required they show they have been harmed in a way that can be traced to the FDA.
The plaintiffs wanted an end to rules introduced in 2016 and 2021 that permitted medication abortions at up to 10 weeks of pregnancy instead of seven, and for mail delivery of the drug without a woman first seeing a doctor in-person.
The suit initially had sought to reverse FDA approval of mifepristone, but that aspect was thrown out by a lower court.
Mifepristone is taken with another drug called misoprostol to perform medication abortions – now the most common method of terminating pregnancies in the US.
Image: Anti-abortion activists outside the Supreme Court in April 2023. Pic: Reuters
The FDA said that after decades of use by millions of women in the US and around the world, mifepristone has proven “extremely safe” and that studies have demonstrated that “serious adverse events are exceedingly rare”.
Advertisement
The plaintiffs, known as the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, argued the FDA acted contrary to its mandate to ensure medications are safe when it eased the restrictions on mifepristone.
They also accused the administration of violating a federal law governing the actions of regulatory agencies.
US District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk broadly sided with them in a 2023 decision that would have effectively pulled the pill off the market.
Analysis: Abortion pill decision offers some respite from complicated patchwork of laws
By Sarah Gough, US producer
Pro-choice campaigners breathed a sigh of relief following the news the Supreme Court will not limit access to medication abortion.
The fight for mifepristone was one of the latest attempts by anti-abortion groups to restrict access to reproductive rights in America following the overturn of Roe v Wade in 2022.
The pill gives much-needed access to abortion care to those who do not yet need to undergo a procedure to terminate their pregnancy. This decision means mifepristone can still be accessed over the counter and through the post with a prescription.
The drug was approved by the FDA more than 20 years ago and has been considered safe ever since. The fact its safety was ever called into question was egregious to many doctors, and women who’d taken the drug, across the country.
It was a unanimous ruling to throw this case out. Unanimous decisions are not something we usually see at the Supreme Court, given the right-wing majority sitting on the bench. However, this was a ruling about how the case was brought, not a moral opinion on whether the abortion pill is necessary or not.
Despite the win for pro-choice groups, there is constant legal wrangling across the US when it comes to abortion care.
The next most consequential upcoming case in front of the Supreme Court concerns whether emergency abortion care can be obtained in spite of abortion bans. It’s being brought out of the state of Idaho, where abortion is entirely banned with limited exceptions, and where some women who go to the emergency room with pregnancy complications are having to be airlifted to nearby states to get the care they need.
Women in restrictive states often have to act via underground methods to obtain an abortion, and doctors live in fear of making hasty, illegal decisions when it comes to reproductive healthcare. What follows is a delay in care, often for the most vulnerable.
The protection of the abortion pill provides some brief respite from a complicated and fraught patchwork of laws.
However, after the FDA appealed, the New Orleans-based 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals did not go as far as Kacsmaryk but still ruled against its move to widen access to the pill.
This decision was placed on hold pending the Supreme Court’s review.
The plaintiffs said they had legal standing to sue because their member doctors would be forced to violate their consciences due to “often be called upon to treat abortion-drug complications” in emergency settings.
The Justice Department said these claims relied on an impermissibly speculative chain of events.
Following the decision, Joe Biden said in a statement: “Today’s decision does not change the fact that the fight for reproductive freedom continues.
“It does not change the fact that the Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade two years ago, and women lost a fundamental freedom.
“It does not change the fact that the right for a woman to get the treatment she needs is imperiled if not impossible in many states.”
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
Meanwhile, Mr Trump – speaking at a campaign event – acknowledged the issue had cost Republicans and that it is too important to ignore.
The presidential hopeful said it was his preference for the decision to be made by the people and individual states.
The mifepristone dispute is not the only abortion case the Supreme Court is due to decide during this presidential election year.
It also is expected to rule by the end of June on the legality of Idaho’s strict Republican-backed abortion ban that forbids terminating a pregnancy even if necessary to protect the health of a pregnant woman facing a medical emergency.
Reading between the lines of President Trump’s social media posts is an art, not a science.
But whether by intention or not, there is always insight in his posts. His Truth Social words reacting to the Israeli attack on Iran are intentionally ambiguous.
When was he told by Israelthat they would strike Iran? Did he give them a green light, or was it more amber?
Was his insistence, as recently as 48 hours ago, that a strike would “blow” the chances of a deal with Iran actually just a ruse to afford Israel the element of surprise? That’s what the Israelis are claiming.
Image: Mr Trump said he ‘gave Iran chance after chance to make a deal’. Pic: Reuters
Clearly, President Trump does not want to give the impression that his ‘don’t strike’ advice was ignored by Netanyahu.
His social posts are filled with enough ambiguity to allow him to maintain his good cop stance alongside Netanyahu, the bad cop: “I gave Iran chance after chance to make a deal. I told them, in the strongest of words, to ‘just do it’…”
More on Donald Trump
Related Topics:
Trump’s ‘art of the deal’, whether it be in real estate or nuclear weapon negotiations, requires unpredictability and ambiguity.
Both of those, as it happens, are useful to hide ineptitude too. The line between diplomatic masterstroke and disastrous diplomacy is thin.
The president is claiming that the Israeli attacks make a deal more, not less, likely because of the pressure Iran will now be under.
Maybe, but many regional watchers are very unconvinced.
Spotify
This content is provided by Spotify, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spotify cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spotify cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spotify cookies for this session only.
An alternative path to negotiations for Iran would be to go fully down the North Korea route, comforted in the knowledge that China – as a big Iranian oil customer – and Russia – as a weapons customer – will be on side.
Trump may think that the pressure of bombardment will force Iran to heel. But the other pressure the Iranian supreme leader is under is the pressure of survival.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:33
Iran attacks analysed
The Israelis and the Americans are calculating that Iran and its proxies are now sufficiently degraded, and so the response will be limp and containable.
They might be right in terms of conventional attacks, but asymmetrical operations are another fear – against Israeli targets or more broadly, softer Western targets in the region or beyond.
Step back from the chaos of the past 24 hours. The broader picture here is regime change.
Netanyahu said as much in his Friday speech, calling for an internal uprising. He ignored history – which suggests people tend to rally round their flag – but more than that, that foreign air strikes alone don’t work.
Look at Libya in 1986, Iraq in 1991, or Yugoslavia in 1999.
Netanyahu wants to go further. Will he take out the supreme leader? Trump does not want another full-scale conflict in the Middle East. Of all the things he is accused of being, a hawkish warmonger he is not.
But there are plenty of politicians on Capitol Hill – on both sides of the divide – who support regime change in Iran.
I was at an event in Congress in December organised by Iranian exiled opposition leaders. I was struck by the cross-party support for regime change in one form or another.
Israel this weekend announced that its military had achieved total air superiority from western Iran to the capital Tehran. That’s remarkable.
Could Trump be persuaded to pursue regime change? Peace, eventually, through strength? His motto adapted.
We are at yet another unsettlingly tense moment for the region.
A manhunt is under way after a US politician and her husband were shot dead in their home in a “politically motivated assassination” – and another politician and his wife were also shot.
Minnesota state representative Melissa Hortman and her husband were killed at their home, Tim Walz, the governor of Minnesota, confirmed.
State senator John Hoffman and his wife were also shot in their home but are expected to survive. The senator, according to officials, is in a stable condition after emergency surgery.
Image: Representative Melissa Hortman and Senator John Hoffman. Pic: Facebook/Minnesota Legislature
Authorities have confirmed that the suspect they are looking for is 57-year-old Vance Boelter – who, in a press conference, was described as a 6ft 1in white male, with brown hair and brown eyes.
Members of the public have been urged not to approach him as he may be armed.
The suspect was reportedly posing as a police officer, and officials said the alleged attacker escaped after an exchange of gunfire.
Both politicians are members of the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:08
US politician killed: Governor calls it ‘targeted political violence’
US President Donald Trump, in a statement, said: “I have been briefed on the terrible shooting that took place in Minnesota, which appears to be a targeted attack against State Lawmakers.
“Our Attorney General, Pam Bondi, and the FBI, are investigating the situation, and they will be prosecuting anyone involved to the fullest extent of the law.
“Such horrific violence will not be tolerated in the United States of America.”
Image: John Hoffman and his wife were shot multiple times at their home. Pic: AP
Authorities have urged residents of the Champlin and Brooklyn Park areas to stay in their homes.
In an earlier Facebook post, Mr Walz said: “I’ve been briefed this morning on an ongoing situation involving targeted shootings in Champlin and Brooklyn Park.
“The Minnesota Department of Public Safety and local law enforcement are on the scene. We will share more information soon.”
Image: Former US president Joe Biden with Melissa Hortman. Pic: Instagram/ melissahortman
At a subsequent news conference, Mr Walz said: “We must all, in Minnesota and across the country, stand against all forms of political violence.
“Those responsible for this will be held accountable.”
He has also urged those in Minnesota not to attend political rallies until the suspect is caught.
Police evacuated the Texas State Capitol and grounds in Austin ahead of an anti-Trump protest on Saturday – citing a credible threat to politicians.
Image: Former US vice president Kamala Harris and Melissa Hortman. Pic: Instagram/ melissahortman
Post-mortem examinations will be conducted to determine the extent of their injuries.
However, it is clear that both Ms Hortman and her spouse died from gunshot wounds, Drew Evans, superintendent of the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, said.
Ms Hortman, a mother of two, was first elected in 2004 – and was the top house Democratic leader in the state legislature. She also served as speaker of the Minnesota House of Representatives.
Mr Hoffman, also a Democrat, was first elected in 2012 – and ran a consulting firm called Hoffman Strategic Advisors.
Hakeem Jeffries, House Democratic leader, has described the shootings as “deeply disturbing” on X, adding that “violence is never acceptable”, and that he is “praying hard” for the victims.
Former Arizona representative, Gabby Giffords, described her friend Ms Hortman as a “true public servant”, who “dedicated her life building a better, safer Minnesota”.
Nancy Pelosi, former speaker of the US House of Representatives, said she was “heartbroken” by the news.
She added: “Unfortunately, we know the tragedy of when political violence hits home very well.
“All of us must remember that it’s not only the act of violence, but also the reaction to it, that can normalise it. This climate of politically-motivated violence must end.”
In a tribute, Democratic National Committee chair Ken Martin said: “Melissa, Mark, John, and Yvette – these are not just names, and this is not just politics.
“These are people. They’re longtime friends to me and Jenn and so many others in Minnesota. They have children, loved ones, neighbors, and friends.”
Mr Martin added: “Today, we recommit ourselves to fight harder for the values that Melissa and Mark embodied – building a kinder, more just, and loving world. If this murderer thinks we will be silenced, he’s wrong.”
US President Donald Trump has revealed details of a one-hour phone call with his Russian counterpart, in which they agreed the conflict between Israel and Iran should end.
Posting on his Truth Social platform, Mr Trump added that he told Vladimir Putin that “his war [in Ukraine] should also end”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:33
Iran’s retaliation analysed
The Iranian response has resulted in at least three people killed and dozens of injuries in Israel, according to medics. Iranian state TV, meanwhile, has reported that 20 children are among the 60 killed in a strike on a Tehran neighbourhood on Saturday.
Iranian missiles were seen entering Israeli airspace on Saturday evening.
Meanwhile, RAF jets and military assets are being sent to the Middle East after Tehran warned the UK and other allies their regional bases would be targeted if they helped defend Israel in the growing conflict between the two heavily armed countries.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:43
Tel Aviv: Buildings and cars destroyed
In his post, Mr Trump said: “President Putin called this morning to very nicely wish me a Happy Birthday, but to more importantly, talk about Iran, a country he knows very well. We talked at length.
“Much less time was spent talking about Russia/Ukraine, but that will be for next week. He is doing the planned prisoner swaps – large numbers of prisoners are being exchanged, immediately, from both sides.
“The call lasted approximately 1 hour. He feels, as do I, this war in Israel-Iran should end, to which I explained, his war should also end.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
7:10
State TV: Children among dozens killed in Iran
Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov said President Putin condemned Israel’s military operation in Iran and expressed concerns about the risk of escalation.
During the conversation, the Russian leader briefed President Trump on his recent talks with the leaders of Israel and Iran – reiterating Russia’s hopes to seek mutually acceptable solutions on Iran’s growing nuclear issue.
Meanwhile, the latest round of US-Iran nuclear talks scheduled for Sunday in Muscat will not take place, a senior US administration official has told Sky’s US partner network NBC News.
However, the official said the US is “not shutting the door to future discussions”.
“While there will be no meeting on Sunday, we remain committed to talks and hope the Iranians will come to the table soon,” the official said.