Supreme Court Goes Wobbly on Abortion Pill, Like Trump

As I explained ten days ago, the Fifth Circuit had a strong basis to stay the 2023 Biden FDA ruling that allowed the abortion pill to be dispensed without an in-person doctor visit.

The Trump FDA had essentially conceded that the Biden rule was enacted without adequate basis in medical studies; Louisiana, challenging the rule, showed that it was spending money on hospital care for women who took the pill without a doctor’s supervision; additional women could suffer or die from complications that could be avoided by a doctor’s care; and the rule actively thwarts Louisiana’s ability to enforce its laws against homicide. Against this is set the federal interest in enforcing a rule first and studying second whether the rule should be a rule at all.

About the Author

Dan McLaughlin

Dan McLaughlin is a senior writer at National Review Online and a fellow at National Review Institute.

Featured Tags

As I explained ten days ago, the Fifth Circuit had a strong basis to stay the 2023 Biden FDA ruling that allowed the abortion pill to be dispensed without an in-person doctor visit.

The Trump FDA had essentially conceded that the Biden rule was enacted without adequate basis in medical studies; Louisiana, challenging the rule, showed that it was spending money on hospital care for women who took the pill without a doctor’s supervision; additional women could suffer or die from complications that could be avoided by a doctor’s care; and the rule actively thwarts Louisiana’s ability to enforce its laws against homicide. Against this is set the federal interest in enforcing a rule first and studying second whether the rule should be a rule at all.