The Supreme Court rejected a challenge on abortion pills, with various opinions emerging on the decision. It is seen as a move towards judicial restraint rather than an endorsement of abortion. Biopharma executives also weighed in on the decision.
"Despite headlines that the court was saving or preserving mifepristone, it did nothing of the sort," @JRubinBlogger writes. "Worse, Americans have plenty of reason to fear what the most radical and aggressive Supreme Court since "Dred Scott" is up to." https://t.co/lQmlLUJtwD
Read what biopharma executives think of the Supreme Court's decision to uphold FDA authority in abortion pill case. https://t.co/vQlaKZLopx
SCOTUS declining to review the FDA’s unwise treatment of abortion pills has nothing to do with endorsing abortion and everything to do with judicial restraint. Thanks @FDRLST for sharing my impressions. https://t.co/SW3FVTLi7d
"Last week, the Supreme Court released a deeply disappointing decision regarding President Joe Biden’s mail-order abortion drug scheme, in FDA v. AHM," writes Emily Erin Davis of @sbaprolife for @twthigherground https://t.co/NhDAh7YLCV
'Silver lining' found in Supremes' rejection of abortion-pill challenge https://t.co/YhSBOW8azL