Vitals Reporting on the pro-life movement

Supreme Court to rule on DIY chemical abortions

Abortion | The U.S. government appeals a ruling that leaves babies and women unprotected
by Leah Hickman
Posted 9/14/20, 12:48 pm

The Supreme Court could rule soon on whether abortionists can prescribe chemical abortion pills during the coronavirus pandemic without a medical provider watching over a woman as she takes them. The Department of Justice filed an emergency motion in August asking the Supreme Court to reinstate safety regulations for the distribution of mifepristone, the first drug in the abortion pill regimen.

In July, U.S. District Judge Theodore Chuang in Maryland ruled women across the nation could access the pills through mail or delivery. A licensed provider must still prescribe the pills, but he or she could assess the mother during a telemedicine appointment. Chuang said U.S. Food and Drug Administration rules requiring mothers to take mifepristone while healthcare workers monitored them in person put the women at risk of contracting COVID-19. But pro-life groups said ignoring the rules would put them at greater risk of life-threatening complications from taking mifepristone too late or during an ectopic pregnancy.

In the Justice Department’s emergency motion, acting Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall reminded the Supreme Court that the FDA implemented the restrictions to mitigate the serious risks mifepristone poses to patients, including heavy bleeding or an incomplete abortion. The agency reviewed and reaffirmed the safety requirements in 2011, 2013, and 2016. During the 2013 review, the FDA indicated that requiring in-person distribution ensured women receive counseling about complications and take the drug in a timely manner, reducing health risks.

Lawyers for the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), the organization behind the original lawsuit challenging the FDA rules, filed a response brief on Tuesday citing “unrebutted evidence” that the rules pose insurmountable obstacles to some patients during the pandemic, making the restrictions “unconstitutional.”

Lawyers in the case expect a Supreme Court ruling within the next two weeks.

Read more Vitals Sign up for the Vitals email
Leah Hickman

Leah is a reporter for WORLD Magazine and WORLD Digital. She is a World Journalism Institute and Hillsdale College graduate. Leah resides in Cleveland, Ohio. Follow her on Twitter @leahmhickman.

Read more from this writer


You must be a WORLD Member and logged in to the website to comment.
  • Narissara
    Posted: Wed, 09/16/2020 10:15 am

    Please, ACOG — and the rest of the pro-death lobby yanking your chain — spare us your hypocrisy.  Just come out and say what you really mean:  It would be terribly inconvenient for a young, healthy woman to contract COVID, but nowhere near as inconvenient as being saddled with an unwanted child.  It would be a tragic loss of life if that young woman were to die from this dreaded disease.  Never mind it's her poor choices that forced her to assume the risk of exposure via a trip to the abortion clinic.  Never mind that 2,000 babies die every day at their mother's hands.  No tragedy there.