Republicans remained relatively quiet on Tuesday as the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a challenge regarding the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) actions to make the abortion pill Mifeprisone easier to access over the course of several years.
Democratic lawmakers sounded off in apparent unison, contrasting with their partisan counterparts and bashing the arguments against the drug and the FDA’s choice to make it more accessible for women.
REPUBLICANS SEE EMBATTLED MENENDEZ’S POTENTIAL INDEPENDENT BID AS CHANCE TO FLIP SENATE SEAT
“Judges need to stay out of women’s health care decisions. Getting prescription abortion medication is a personal decision, not the Supreme Court’s or any politician’s. This is another step in Republicans’ fight to ban abortion nationwide and I am having none of it,” wrote Sen. Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., on X, formerly known as Twitter.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., added, “The case before the Supreme Court today is not about the safety or efficacy of medication abortion. The FDA has already made it clear that mifepristone is safe & effective.”
“This case is about Donald Trump & the Republican Party marching us toward a full-on national abortion ban,” she continued, tying the case to the upcoming general election.
Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., stressed, “We cannot afford to go back” in reference to the case being considered.
“Medication abortion is safe, effective & routine healthcare,” said progressive squad-member Rep. Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass.
“SCOTUS must protect access to mifepristone & we must affirm abortion care as the human right that it is,” she emphasized.
PRO-LIFE GROUPS ASSAIL FDA FOR ‘RECKLESS DISREGARD’ IN SUPREME COURT ABORTION PILL CASE
Democratic lawmakers were vocal on social media ahead of and during the arguments, while many GOP representatives and senators focused on other things. The difference between the two parties’ public statements during the case’s arguments comes as abortion is predicted to play a critical role in the 2024 election in November.
While most GOP senators avoided commentary, some of the particularly devoted Pro-Life politicians sounded off.
Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., posted several fact checks to X, addressing “abortion industry lies.”
“I’m praying for the SCOTUS justices as they hear oral arguments regarding the FDA’s decisions to loosen safety protocols of mifepristone. I hope they will prioritize women’s safety and reconsider the approval of this dangerous drug. #WomensHealthMatters,” wrote the chair of the Senate Pro-Life Caucus, Sen. Cindy Hyde Smith, R-Miss.
However, the relatively few public Republican remarks on the case on Tuesday doesn’t mean many of the lawmakers aren’t supportive of the challenge. In fact, 145 Republican representatives and senators signed an amicus brief last month in support of the respondents, the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, Et Al.
LETITIA JAMES RALLIES PRO-CHOICE CROWD OUTSIDE SUPREME COURT: ‘MARCH TO THE POLLS’
On the other hand, 50 senators and 207 House members previously signed a separate amicus brief backing up the FDA and the use of Mifepristone.
During the oral arguments, the lawyer for challengers to the FDA and abortion medication, Erin Hawley, asked the high court to require the restrictions that were removed surrounding Mifepristone be re-enstated.
“The lower court’s decision merely restored long-standing and crucial protections under which millions of women used abortion drugs,” she said of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals previous ruling to roll back many of the FDA’s actions starting in 2016 to make it easier to dispense and access the medication.
Hawley, senior counsel at the Alliance Defending Freedom, is also the wife of Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo.
Many of the court’s justices appeared skeptical of the case’s trajectory to the Supreme Court, given the small pool of affected parties. “This case seems like a prime example of turning what could be a small lawsuit into a nationwide, legislative assembly on an FDA rule,” said conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch.
But fellow conservative justices Samuel Alito, who authored the opinion in Dobbs. V. Jackson Women’s Health Organization overturning Roe. V. Wade, and Clarence Thomas criticized the idea that the FDA is immune from challenges.
Alito claimed during the arguments that the agency is seeking to be “infallible.”
