US Supreme Court rejects bid to restrict access to abortion pill mifepristone

Published

11 months ago

June 13, 2024

admin

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.

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

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.”

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.

World

Canada might be the second election Trump wins in six months

Published

44 mins ago

April 28, 2025

admin

Canada might be the second election Trump wins in six months

When Canada goes to the polls today, it might be the second election Donald Trump wins in six months.

The US president has transformed Canada’s political landscape, and the “Trump effect” looks like it will be the difference between winners and losers.

Tariffs, and his threat to annexe the country as the 51st state, have provoked a surge in Canadian nationalism, and it’s made a favourite of the candidate styled anti-Trump.

Step forward, Mark Carney: Former governor of the Bank of England, now Canadian prime minister.

His ruling Liberal party had been written off as an electoral contender. Canadians had turned their back on the party after a decade in power under Carney’s predecessor, Justin Trudeau.

The opposition Conservative Party, under the effective leadership of Pierre Poilievre, grew to a 25-point lead in the polls on the promise of change on the economy, crime and a chronic housing crisis.

However, his conservative politics are more aligned with the neighbour in the White House and, in Canada right now, it’s not a good look.

In a stunning reversal of fortune, the Conservative Party’s lead vanished within weeks, as Canadians turned to Carney as the choice to take on Trump.

If he wins, the swing from Conservative to Liberal will be the biggest swing in the polls in recent democratic history.

Carney, 60, is the former governor of the Bank of Canada, as well as England. He replaced Mr Trudeau as Liberal Party leader and Canadian prime minister after his predecessor stepped down last month.

Polls indicate that Canadians see Carney as a stronger choice to negotiate with Donald Trump. He is a veteran of economic turmoil, having dealt with the 2008 financial crisis and Brexit.

At a weekend news conference, Sky News asked the Canadian prime minister what lessons he’d learned from Brexit that could be applied to his dealings with Donald Trump.

He replied: “The lessons of Brexit are beginning to be applied. When you break off, or substantially rupture, trading relationships with your major trading partners, including the most important trading partner of the United States, you end up with slower growth, higher inflation, higher interest rates, volatility, weaker currency, a weaker economy.

“We’re in the early stages of that in the United States, and that’s one of the important things here. With respect to influencing the president, with respect to the dynamics of a negotiation, America’s going to get weaker as time goes on, we’re going to get stronger.”

Canada’s vote is as close as it gets to a single-issue election.

Carney’s position as favourite is reinforced consistently by the opinion polls, although the gap narrowed as election day approached.

It could yet be tight.

World

Trump ‘very disappointed’ in Russian strikes on Ukraine and calls for Putin to ‘sit down and sign a deal’

Published

7 hours ago

April 28, 2025

admin

Trump 'very disappointed' in Russian strikes on Ukraine and calls for Putin to 'sit down and sign a deal'

Donald Trump has said he’s “very disappointed” with Russia as he continues to push for a peace deal to end the war in Ukraine.

On Saturday, the US president met with Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the Vatican for their first face-to-face meeting since their explosive White House summit.

The Ukrainian president said the meeting ahead of Pope Francis’s funeral could end up being “historic.” Hours later, Mr Trump questioned Vladimir Putin’s appetite for peace in a Truth Social post.

Speaking before boarding Air Force One on Sunday, Mr Trump again said the meeting went well, and that the Ukrainian leader was “calmer”.

“I think he understands the picture, I think he wants to make a deal,” he said, before turning to Mr Putin and Russia.

“I want him to stop shooting, sit down and sign a deal,” the US president said, adding he was “very disappointed that they did the bombing of those places (including Kyiv, where nine people were killed in a Russian airstrike on Friday) after discussions”.

However, Mr Trump said he thinks Mr Zelenskyy is ready to give up Crimea, which the Ukrainian leader has repeatedly said he would refuse to do.

He added that “we’ll see what happens in the next few days” and said “don’t talk to me about Crimea, talk to Obama and Biden about Crimea”.

Russia annexed Crimea in 2014, while Barack Obama was president.

Meanwhile, US secretary of state Marco Rubio told Sky’s US partner network NBC News that a peace deal to end the war was “closer in general than they’ve been any time in the last three years, but it’s still not there”.

“If this was an easy war to end, it would have been ended by someone else a long time ago,” he added on the Meet the Press show.

It comes after North Korea confirmed it had deployed troops to fight for Russia, months after Ukraine and Western officials said its forces were in Europe.

State media outlet KCNA reported North Korean soldiers made an “important contribution” to expelling Ukrainian forces from Russian territory, likely to be the Kursk region.

👉 Follow Trump100 on your podcast app 👈

KCNA said leader Kim Jong Un made the decision to deploy troops to Russia and notified Moscow, and quoted him as saying: “They who fought for justice are all heroes and representatives of the honour of the motherland.”

It also quoted the country’s ruling Workers’ Party as saying the end of the battle to liberate Kursk showed the “highest strategic level of the firm militant friendship” between North Korea and Russia.

Last June, Mr Kim and Mr Putin signed a comprehensive strategic partnership treaty after a state visit – his first to the country in 24 years.

The North Korean leader promised at the time “full support and solidarity to the Russian government, army and people in carrying out the special military operation in Ukraine”.

World

40 killed in blast at Iran’s biggest port as Tehran denies explosion ‘linked to fuel for missiles’

Published

7 hours ago

April 28, 2025

admin

40 killed in blast at Iran's biggest port as Tehran denies explosion 'linked to fuel for missiles'

At least 40 people have been killed and several hundred more injured after an explosion and fire at Iran’s largest port, according to state media.

The blast, at the Shahid Rajaei container hub near the southern city of Bandar Abbas, happened on Saturday as Iran held a third round of talks with the US in Oman about Tehran’s nuclear programme.

Shipping containers burned, goods inside were badly damaged and the explosion was so powerful that windows several miles away were shattered, reports said.

Helicopters and aircraft dumped water from the air on the blaze and by Sunday afternoon it was 90% extinguished, the head of Iran’s Red Crescent Society told state media.

Officials said port activities had resumed in unaffected parts of Shahid Rajaei.

Out of the 752 people who had received treatment for their injuries, 190 were still being treated in medical centres on Sunday, according to Iran’s crisis management organisation.

Chemicals at the port were suspected to have worsened the blast, but the exact cause of the explosion was not clear.

Iran’s defence ministry denied international media reports that the explosion may be connected to the mishandling of solid fuel used for missiles.

The reports were “aligned with enemy psyops [psychological operations]”, according to a ministry spokesperson, who told state TV the blast-hit area did not contain any military cargo.

According to the Associated Press, British security company Ambrey said that the port in March received sodium perchlorate, which is used to propel ballistic missiles and the mishandling of which could have led to the explosion.

The Financial Times previously reported two Iranian vessels had shipped from China enough of the ingredient to propel up to 260 mid-range missiles.

It was reportedly to help Tehran replenish stocks after its missile attacks on Israel in 2024.

Iran’s military has sought to deny the delivery of sodium perchlorate from China.

Iran’s state-run Irna news agency reported on Sunday that Russian President Vladimir Putin deployed several emergency aircraft to Bandar Abbas to provide help.