Scholarlink

The Supreme Court’s rejection of a challenge to the availability of the medical abortion drug mifepristone on the basis of the plaintiffs’ lack of standing comes with continued threats to reproductive rights. By basing its standing decision on the availability of conscience protections for plaintiff doctors who do not wish to treat complications from medical abortions, the majority appears to have expanded the scope of existing federal conscience protections for doctors who oppose abortion. At the same time, the rejection of this suit leaves open the opportunity for new plaintiffs, like individual states, to succeed in future challenges on the basis of standing, and for the legislative or executive branch to directly limit access to the drug.

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine: Denying Standing for Anti-Abortion Doctor Groups While Expanding Conscience Protections

  • 章节

  • 发表日期：

    2025年

查看全文
  • Susan Etta Keller

摘要

The Supreme Court’s rejection of a challenge to the availability of the medical abortion drug mifepristone on the basis of the plaintiffs’ lack of standing comes with continued threats to reproductive rights. By basing its standing decision on the availability of conscience protections for plaintiff doctors who do not wish to treat complications from medical abortions, the majority appears to have expanded the scope of existing federal conscience protections for doctors who oppose abortion. At the same time, the rejection of this suit leaves open the opportunity for new plaintiffs, like individual states, to succeed in future challenges on the basis of standing, and for the legislative or executive branch to directly limit access to the drug.