DeepSummary
The transcript covers a podcast episode discussing a Supreme Court case regarding the FDA's approval process for the abortion pill mifepristone. Carrie Ann Baker, a professor at Smith College, explains the history of anti-abortion activists trying to block mifepristone's approval through targeting pharmaceutical companies, the FDA, and spreading misinformation about its safety. She discusses how the plaintiffs in this case lack legal standing and rely on flawed, retracted studies to claim the drug is dangerous.
Baker highlights that medication abortion now accounts for 63% of all abortions in the U.S., and banning telemedicine and mail delivery of abortion pills would severely restrict access, especially for rural and low-income people. She notes the anti-abortion movement's strategy has been to limit clinic access and harass providers, which medication abortion circumvents. Reviving the antiquated Comstock Act to ban mailing abortion pills nationwide is a stretch, but could align with broader aims to return to pre-modern norms.
While the pharmaceutical industry has warned the Supreme Court that questioning FDA approval processes could destabilize drug development, Baker fears the Court may find a compromise restricting telemedicine abortion under the guise of the Comstock Act. However, she expresses hope the case will be dismissed on lack of legal standing.
Key Episodes Takeaways
- The Supreme Court case against the FDA's approval of mifepristone is based on questionable legal standing and dubious scientific evidence from anti-abortion activist groups.
- Banning telemedicine for medication abortion could devastate access for many Americans, especially low-income and rural populations, forcing more to seek pills through informal underground networks.
- Anti-abortion activists have a long history of harassment, misinformation, and targeting pharmaceutical companies to obstruct abortion pill access.
- Reviving the antiquated Comstock Act to ban mailing abortion pills is a stretch legally, but aligns with broader conservative aims to return to pre-modern norms around contraception and abortion.
- While the pharmaceutical industry opposes undermining the FDA's drug approval process, some fear the Supreme Court could find a compromise restricting telemedicine under Comstock.
- Dismissing the case on lack of legal standing is seen as the best hope to avoid a ruling with potential to disrupt reproductive rights and medicine regulation.
- The anti-abortion movement's central strategy has been limiting clinic access through harassment, which medication abortion has circumvented, driving their efforts.
- Accurate data shows medication abortion is extremely safe, contradicting plaintiffs' claims, which rely on retracted, flawed studies from biased sources.
Top Episodes Quotes
- “If they ban telemedicine abortion by enforcing the Comstock order, then you know, the number of abortions will drop precipitously in this country. Well, I should say abortions through the formal medical system. As I said before, people will get pills now. You can order pills online for $25 and have them in your mailbox within days.“ by Carrie Ann Baker
- “If the Supreme Court were to completely remove mifepristone from the market, that would be the most extreme reaction. But if they ban telemedicine, then access to abortion is severely restricted through the formal medical system throughout the United States, and it will be devastating to hundreds of thousands of women and people who can become pregnant each year.“ by Carrie Ann Baker
- “The court is captured. The court is captured. And I'm talking about those lower courts and the Fifth Circuit. I fear, you know, that the Supreme Court also, you know, it's like they set everything up. They set up the science. They set up this fake organization. They set up the courts, you know, through Trump appointments of these judges.“ by Carrie Ann Baker
Entities
Person
Company
Product
Organization
Book
Episode Information
Amicus With Dahlia Lithwick | Law, justice, and the courts
Slate Podcasts
3/23/24