Skip to content Skip to footer

Supreme Court Will Hear Case on Access to Mifepristone Abortion Pill

The case, concerning the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of mifepristone, will be argued early next year.

Mifepristone, used in combination with misoprostol, offers a safe and effective mechanism to terminate a first-trimester pregnancy -- a regimen endorsed by the World Health Organization.

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to weigh in on the future of mifepristone, a drug used in more than half of all abortions in the United States, setting up another major dispute over abortion rights less than two years after the court’s conservative majority voted to overturn Roe v. Wade.

The case, concerning the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of mifepristone, will be argued early next year. That means the court, which last year overturned Roe in a 6-3 decision, could rule on the issue sometime next year.

Mifepristone, when used in combination with a drug called misoprostol, offers a safe and effective mechanism to terminate a first-trimester pregnancy. Health care professionals can provide the drug in-person to patients or prescribe it virtually and mail the medication, according to 2021 and 2023 guidelines from the FDA. The mifepristone-misoprostol regimen is endorsed by authorities such as the World Health Organization.

The White House issued a statement backing the current policy. “This administration will continue to stand by FDA’s independent approval and regulation of mifepristone as safe and effective,” Press Secretary Karine Jean Pierre said. She added, “We continue to urge Congress to pass a law restoring the protections of Roe v. Wade.”

Since Roe was overturned, giving states the power to ban abortion, mifepristone has taken on an even greater significance. In states where the procedure remains legal, clinics seeing an increase in out-of-state patients have relied on medication abortion — which is often quicker, easier and cheaper to provide, and which can be prescribed to patients over telemedicine in some states — as a way to quickly scale up operations.

Blocking mifepristone would make it impossible to continue providing the standard regimen of medication abortion care — meaning that the Supreme Court’s decision could dramatically reshape what abortion-related care medical providers can offer, even in states where the procedure remains legal.

This case, brought by a group of anti-abortion medical practitioners, concerns the FDA’s approval of mifepristone, which was granted more than 20 years ago. The plaintiffs have argued that the agency inappropriately rushed to bring the drug to market, and that the government should now rescind its approval and block distribution of mifepristone. In fact, the FDA took four years to approve mifepristone, and the drug was already available in Europe. Reversing approval of a drug in this manner would be unprecedented. A federal judge in Texas, where the case was originally filed, ruled that mifepristone should be taken off the market in April. So far, other legal authorities haven’t taken the same view.

In August, judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit — considered the most conservative appeals court in the country — ruled that it was too late to rescind mifepristone’s approval, but did take other steps that would curb access to the drug. Specifically, the court ruled to block changes the FDA had made since 2016 to expand access to the drug, such as allowing health care providers who are not doctors to dispense it, approving it for use for up to 10 weeks of pregnancy instead of 7, and the more recent telemedicine authorization. (The government’s steps to expand access have all been endorsed by major health organizations.)

The decision did not take effect; earlier this year, the Supreme Court said that no federal court’s decision could change access to mifepristone while this case proceeds.

The Supreme Court could endorse the Fifth Circuit’s decision, which would significantly reduce access to the two-drug regimen for medication abortion. It could also vote to undo mifepristone’s approval, which would have even further-reaching effects. It could also rule to leave the drug’s approval unchanged.

A reversal wouldn’t directly affect access to surgical abortions. And even with mifepristone blocked, medication abortions would still be possible. Without that drug, patients could attempt to end their pregnancies simply by taking larger doses of the second medication used in abortions, misoprostol. That regimen, while very effective, has a somewhat higher failure rate than taking the combination of drugs, and can be more painful.

Truthout Is Preparing to Meet Trump’s Agenda With Resistance at Every Turn

Dear Truthout Community,

If you feel rage, despondency, confusion and deep fear today, you are not alone. We’re feeling it too. We are heartsick. Facing down Trump’s fascist agenda, we are desperately worried about the most vulnerable people among us, including our loved ones and everyone in the Truthout community, and our minds are racing a million miles a minute to try to map out all that needs to be done.

We must give ourselves space to grieve and feel our fear, feel our rage, and keep in the forefront of our mind the stark truth that millions of real human lives are on the line. And simultaneously, we’ve got to get to work, take stock of our resources, and prepare to throw ourselves full force into the movement.

Journalism is a linchpin of that movement. Even as we are reeling, we’re summoning up all the energy we can to face down what’s coming, because we know that one of the sharpest weapons against fascism is publishing the truth.

There are many terrifying planks to the Trump agenda, and we plan to devote ourselves to reporting thoroughly on each one and, crucially, covering the movements resisting them. We also recognize that Trump is a dire threat to journalism itself, and that we must take this seriously from the outset.

Last week, the four of us sat down to have some hard but necessary conversations about Truthout under a Trump presidency. How would we defend our publication from an avalanche of far right lawsuits that seek to bankrupt us? How would we keep our reporters safe if they need to cover outbreaks of political violence, or if they are targeted by authorities? How will we urgently produce the practical analysis, tools and movement coverage that you need right now — breaking through our normal routines to meet a terrifying moment in ways that best serve you?

It will be a tough, scary four years to produce social justice-driven journalism. We need to deliver news, strategy, liberatory ideas, tools and movement-sparking solutions with a force that we never have had to before. And at the same time, we desperately need to protect our ability to do so.

We know this is such a painful moment and donations may understandably be the last thing on your mind. But we must ask for your support, which is needed in a new and urgent way.

We promise we will kick into an even higher gear to give you truthful news that cuts against the disinformation and vitriol and hate and violence. We promise to publish analyses that will serve the needs of the movements we all rely on to survive the next four years, and even build for the future. We promise to be responsive, to recognize you as members of our community with a vital stake and voice in this work.

Please dig deep if you can, but a donation of any amount will be a truly meaningful and tangible action in this cataclysmic historical moment. We are presently looking for 98 new monthly donors before midnight tonight.

We’re with you. Let’s do all we can to move forward together.

With love, rage, and solidarity,

Maya, Negin, Saima, and Ziggy