Connect with us

Published

on

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 women rights 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.

More on Abortion

Read more: Why were there calls to ban abortion drug?

Anti-abortion activists outside the Supreme Court in April 2023. Pic: Reuters
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”.

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.

Read more on Sky News:
What’s changed since Roe v Wade decision was overturned?

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
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp

Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News

Tap here

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.

Continue Reading

World

Helicopter carrying Hindu pilgrims crashes in India, killing seven people

Published

on

By

Helicopter carrying Hindu pilgrims crashes in India, killing seven people

A helicopter carrying Hindu pilgrims has crashed in India, killing seven people on board.

The accident happened within minutes of the helicopter taking off, officials said, on what should have been a 10-minute flight.

The helicopter was flying to Guptkashi, a prominent Hindu pilgrimage site in the Himalayas, from Kedarnath temple town in the northern Indian state of Uttarakhand.

It comes three days after an Air India flight crashed less than a minute after taking off from Ahmedabad airport in northwestern India, killing at least 270 people.

The helicopter, which was operated by private helicopter service Aryan Aviation, went down in a forested area several miles from the Kedarnath pilgrimage route at around 5.30am local time.

Officials said the crash was believed to have been caused by poor weather conditions.

Authorities say they have launched a search and rescue operation and are expected to review operational protocols for flights in the region.

More on India

The dead include the pilot and pilgrims from the neighbouring state of Uttar Pradesh and western states of Maharashtra and Gujarat, according to officials. The bodies were badly burned in a fire that followed the crash, they said.

Smoke and debris at the crash site. Pic: Reuters
Image:
Smoke and debris at the site. Pic: Reuters

Tens of thousands of pilgrims visit Kedarnath, which is home to one of the four most sacred Hindu temple shrines, each summer. Many use helicopter services due to the difficult mountainous terrain.

Helicopter mishaps are not uncommon in the region, where sudden weather changes and high-altitude flying conditions can pose risks.

Earlier this month, a helicopter operating in the Kedarnath Valley made an emergency landing shortly after taking off on a highway due to a technical fault. The pilot was injured but all five passengers on board were unharmed.

In May, a helicopter crashed in Uttarkashi district, killing six people, including the pilot. One person survived.

Continue Reading

World

Irish politician faces deportation from Egypt after trying to cross into Gaza

Published

on

By

Irish politician faces deportation from Egypt after trying to cross into Gaza

An Irish politician who was detained in Egypt trying to cross into Gaza says the police were violent towards the group after seizing his phone.

People Before Profit-Solidarity TD (MP) Paul Murphy was part of a large demonstration attempting to march to the Rafah crossing in a bid to get aid into the region.

The opposition politician said his phone and passport were confiscated on Friday before he was put on a bus to Cairo airport for deportation.

Israel-Iran live: ‘Tehran will burn’ if it keeps firing missiles

Footage of the seconds before his phone was seized shows authorities forcibly dragging protesters away from the sit-down demonstration.

Ireland’s deputy premier said several Irish citizens who were detained have now been released. Mr Murphy confirmed he was among the released protesters, posting a photo on his Facebook page saying he was back in Cairo and “meeting shortly to decide next steps”.

In a message from Mr Murphy after he was detained, posted online by his social media team, he said: “I’m ok, but they still have my phone.

“Egyptian police say we’re going to airport but this isn’t the road we came on because there are 1000s of marchers on the streets. They’re taking us south past a lake, then west towards Cairo.

“Violence got worse after they seized my phone.

“One American woman in my group was badly kicked & beaten, and had her hijab torn off.”

Sky News has contacted Egypt’s police regarding Mr Murphy’s claims of violence towards the group.

Mr Murphy previously said other Irish citizen were among those who had been stopped from entering Gaza.

“The world has watched a horrific genocide for the past 20 months. Since March, a total attempt of starvation,” he added.

“And that this is a peaceful march to demand that it be ended and demand that western governments stop their complicity.”

Appeal to foreign affairs minister

Mr Murphy’s partner, Councillor Jess Spear, had previously appealed to Ireland’s Foreign Affairs Minister and deputy premier Simon Harris to make a public statement on Mr Murphy’s detention.

She expressed “relief” that the group had been released from detention.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

The deadly road to Gaza aid point

She said: “However, they still want to reach Rafah to try and get humanitarian aid into Gaza. That has been the sole purpose of being in Egypt.

“Paul has appealed to Tanaiste Simon Harris to put pressure on the Egyptian authorities to let the marchers reach Rafah. The situation of the people of Gaza worsens by the day as they suffer starvation imposed by Israel.”

Continue Reading

World

Nuclear threat wasn’t the only reason Israel attacked Iran

Published

on

By

Nuclear threat wasn't the only reason Israel attacked Iran

Why did Israel attack Iran? Certainly, it was worried about the threat of a nuclear weapon being developed.

But it’s also becoming clearer that there was a second reason – that this is about laying the ground for regime change in Tehran.

Follow latest: Israel warns ‘Tehran will burn’ if it continues

Because, hours after his country launched its first, surprise attack, the message from Benjamin Netanyahu couldn’t be clearer – Iranians, he said, should overthrow their “evil and oppressive regime”. He said Israel’s attack would “pave the way for you to achieve your freedom”.

On the one hand, he would say that, wouldn’t he? The Iranian government does not recognise the legitimacy of the Israeli state and has called for its destruction, while funding proxy groups that have attacked Israel – including Hamas, Lebanese Hezbollah, and the Houthis in Yemen.

But perhaps this time there is more than just wishful thinking.

Although it’s very hard to gauge the level of opposition in Iran, it seems likely the majority of the population of 90 million are at least disenchanted with the regime.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Netanyahu calls on Iranians to help “thwart” Tehran regime

Living standards have fallen and supplies are running short. While tens of billions of dollars have been spent on a nuclear programme, electricity is being rationed and cooking gas is running low.

Priority is being given to those who are close to the regime, notably the members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), a branch of the Iranian army that is fiercely loyal to the ruling regime.

The IRGC are crucial in propping up Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the country’s 86-year-old supreme leader. Not only do they offer military power, but also domestic surveillance, intimidation and secret policing in order to stifle dissent.

So for any opposition to emerge, let alone flourish, the IRGC would need to be degraded – and that is precisely what Israel has done, targeting its senior leaders as well as bases.

👉Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim on your podcast app👈

The regular army, so far, has been left alone. Israel’s gamble is that a majority of the rest of the military harbour the same dislike of the IRGC as the wider population.

It was no coincidence that Netanyahu quoted the expression “woman, life, freedom”, which was a rallying call during the 2022 protests in Iran – eventually suppressed by the IRGC.

It is very hard to believe that a coherent, public opposition movement will burst into life any time soon. Iranians are well aware their regime will respond with brutality against any attempted uprising.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Iranian ballistic missile strikes Israel

Instead, dissidents seem to be biding their time and waiting to see if Israel continues its assaults, and whether they can sense genuine signs that the regime is starting to struggle to maintain control. If the cracks emerge, then regime change – or at least an attempt – is possible.

Possible, but not certain. “They will do anything to stay in power, and when other uprisings have happened, they’ve been successfully suppressed,” one Middle East diplomat tells me.

“And there is no unifying leader ready to step in. Even if there is regime change, it could be a military takeover rather than a popular uprising.”

Read more:
All we know about military chiefs killed by Israel

What are Iran’s military capabilities?

Follow The World
Follow The World

Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday

Tap to follow

And that leaves one final question – if Khamenei did feel his grip on power was failing, might he still have the time, desire and power to resort to final, desperate military actions? The truth is, we don’t know.

At the moment, the Middle East is a region full of unanswerable, high-risk questions.

Continue Reading

Trending