Yesterday the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments in FDA v. Alliance Hippocratic Medicine and Danco Laboratories, L.L.C. v. Alliance Hippocratic Medicine.
Here are the highlights.
The FDA is being sued for its sloppy and political approval of the dangerous chemical abortion pill. Since that approval, the FDA has systematically jettisoned crucial safeguards for women who take this drug. The case presents the Court with an opportunity to protect women and their babies from the dangers of the abortion pill.
Total Lack of Concern for Women
During the proceedings, the FDA’s disregard for women’s health and safety was made apparent. When questioned about the 500% increase in emergency room visits associated with chemical abortion pills, a statistic that was not challenged, General Elizabeth B. Prelogar, Solicitor General of the Department of Justice, responded that such visits did not necessarily constitute an event that warranted their concern.
Chief Justice Roberts asked, “Is there a number at which your argument would — would change? A significant number of consequences? A higher likelihood of an emergency room visit?” Ms. Prelogar responded, “It’s hard for me to imagine that it could…”
FDA Thinks it’s Untouchable
Justice Alito asked, “Is there anybody who can sue and get a judicial ruling on whether what FDA did was lawful? General Prelogar, answered, “I think that with respect to these regulatory changes, it’s hard to identify anyone who would have standing to sue…”
All About the Money
Justice Alito had this revealing back and forth with Jessica L. Ellsworth representing Danco Laboratories
that produces the chemical abortion pills. She danced around his direct questions about money.
Justice Alito: How is your company aggrieved by the challenge that is brought in this case? …your version of mifepristone is the only product you are currently marketing, is that right?
Ms. Ellsworth: That’s correct, Justice Alito.
Justice Alito: And the Fifth Circuit decision does not prohibit you from continuing to produce and – and sell that product, right?
Ms. Ellsworth: That is correct.
Justice Alito: All right. And so I gather your injury is that you think you’re going to sell more if the restrictions that previously were in place were lifted?
Ms. Ellsworth: Yes.
Turning ERs into Abortion Centers
Because the lax requirements don’t require in-person medical visits, Erin M. Hawley, representing the pro-lifers said, “What FDA’s regime has done is turn ER rooms into those follow-up visits.” Thus, pro-life emergency room physicians are being forced to clean up the mess begun by chemical abortion pills when their deeply held moral or religious beliefs dictate that they want nothing to do with abortion.
Raw Politics at Work
Early last month – just in time for the Supreme Court oral arguments – Sage Publications announced they retracted, three research papers that supported the facts surrounding the FDA lawsuit. The deletions were done at the request of one pro-abortion person who called the content misleading. Life Issues Institute stated then that this was a raw political decision to hurt the case of pro-lifers before the US Supreme Court and not because of any legitimate scientific concern. The research is sound.
As if on cue, Justice Jackson asked Ms. Ellsworth about poor research. Ellsworth responded, “They have since been retracted for lack of scientific rigor and for misleading presentations of data.”
These oral arguments clearly demonstrated that the FDA and Danco Laboratories lack any concern for the safety and wellbeing of women, and certainly not for the babies they kill.” Keep praying!
Speaking out for Life,
Brad Mattes,
President, Life Issues Institute
Leave a Reply