News Release

The Supreme Court, Medication Abortion, and the FDA: What’s at Stake?

In advance of oral arguments about access to medication abortion before the Supreme Court on March 26, KFF examines how a Court ruling for the plaintiffs would limit access to mifepristone blocking its use in telehealth and distribution through pharmacies, including in states where abortion is legal and protected. In addition, it could potentially weaken the role of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in drug reviews—something the Court has never done before.

As part of its explainer, KFF describes the issues at stake in the outcome of Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine (AHM) v. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and Danco Laboratories LLC v. AHM, and examines the lower court rulings that led to the Supreme Court taking the case, and the legal standing of the plaintiffs, who are anti-abortion organizations and doctors—and their claims. With medication abortion accounting for nearly two thirds of abortions in the U.S. and 16% of all abortions now provided through telehealth where abortion pills are mailed to the patient, the outcome of the case could limit access to medication abortion throughout the country. 

KFF also explores the potentially far-reaching implications for the Court’s ruling on the FDA’s authority to continue to regulate a wide range of drugs, including those that could be perceived to be controversial today and in the future.

Additional KFF resources about medication abortion in the United States include:

KFF Headquarters: 185 Berry St., Suite 2000, San Francisco, CA 94107 | Phone 650-854-9400
Washington Offices and Barbara Jordan Conference Center: 1330 G Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005 | Phone 202-347-5270 | Email Alerts: | |

The independent source for health policy research, polling, and news, KFF is a nonprofit organization based in San Francisco, California.