The woman arguing to restrict the abortion pill in the U.S.
Good morning, Broadsheet readers! Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced Nicole Shanahan as his running mate for an independent presidential bid in 2024, Carlyle Group added a fifth woman to its C-suite, and the Supreme Court began hearing oral arguments in the abortion pill case. Have a wonderful Wednesday.
- Limiting access. Less than two years after the conservative majority of the Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade, it will once again decide the fate of a different kind of abortion access in the U.S. On Tuesday, the justices began hearing oral arguments to decide whether to restrict access to the widely used abortion drug mifepristone, including in states where terminations are legal.
At the center of the challenge against the drug is Erin Morrow Hawley, a lawyer with the conservative Christian legal group the Alliance Defending Freedom and the wife of Republican Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley. In her arguments, Hawley claimed the drug is unsafe, despite more than 100 studies finding it to be safe (and two studies finding the pill unsafe were recently retracted).
But Hawley is more than just a legal representative for the cause—she also "represents the ideals of womanhood many in the antiabortion and conservative Christian movement seek to elevate," making her "ideal for this moment," according to a recent New York Times profile: She’s a Christian mother of three who has a longtime interest in limiting the role of government in many aspects of American life.
Medication abortion is the most common form of abortion in the country, and its prevalence has been growing in recent years. The current case was brought by a group of antiabortion doctors and organizations who sued the Food and Drug Administration over the approval of the drug, and also its availability by mail. More broadly, it challenges the regulatory authority of the Food and Drug Administration.
At least according to major outlets like the New York Times and the Washington Post, the justices seemed skeptical of limiting access. While some of the conservative members of the court, including Justice Samuel Alito, seemed to straight-forwardly question the FDA’s authority, Chief Justice John Roberts—whom Hawley actually clerked for in the past—and Justice Neil Gorsuch questioned her on why a nationwide ban was appropriate.
Before addressing the merits of the case, the justices must first decide if the plaintiffs actually have standing to bring the case—they must demonstrate that they will suffer concrete harm because of the availability of the pill. The liberal justices and at least some of the conservative ones seemed skeptical, with Gorsuch saying the effort was brought by “a handful of individuals.”
A decision is expected by the end of June. Depending on how the justices decide, access to mifepristone could be severely curtailed.
Alicia Adamczyk
alicia.adamczyk@fortune.com
The Broadsheet is Fortune's newsletter for and about the world's most powerful women. Today's edition was curated by Joseph Abrams. Subscribe here.
This story was originally featured on Fortune.com
