Health Law Highlights

What’s it to You? Justice Scalia’s 41-Year-Old Gatekeeping Question on “Standing” Influences Court to Uphold FDA’s Regulation of Mifepristone

Summary of article from Akerman LLP, by Noam Fischman, Danielle Gordet:

On June 13, 2024, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that doctors and medical associations did not have standing to challenge the FDA’s approvals of mifepristone, a drug used for terminating pregnancies. The court found that the plaintiffs’ objections to abortion and the FDA’s regulation of mifepristone did not suffice to establish Article III standing for the lawsuit. The decision overturns a previous ruling by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, which held that the plaintiffs had standing and were likely to win. The Court rejected several arguments from the plaintiffs, including claims of potential moral objections and economic injuries. The ruling suggests that some legal issues may not have a judicial resolution, and instead should be addressed by the legislative branch.