The Supreme Court’s 7-2 ruling that at least for now preserves women’s access to an abortion drug in the United States sends a “signal” to lower courts that little appetite exists on the nation’s highest court to ban mifepristone, a legal expert said Friday.
“It is a signal,” NYU law professor Ryan Goodman said during an appearance on CNN’s Erin Burnett OutFront.
"And it's a signal in part because they might have certain views on abortion. But the case is in this particular posture where there's this issue of standing. Can plaintiffs bring claims do they have to prove that they themselves would be harmed by the drug being on the market. It's a radical position that's been taken by the courts below. So would they really want to flip back a bunch of other Supreme Court precedents to try to take that claim," Goodman said.
"They've sent a signal. The fact that they only had two justices in dissent, Alito and Thomas, which were expected, is a signal to the Fifth Circuit. The fifth circuit is a very conservative court, but now they might be thinking, Okay, if we go in a certain direction of overturning the FDA, we're going to be overturned by the Supreme Court, and the courts don’t like to do that.
IN OTHER NEWS: ‘Official oppression’: Video shows enraged Florida cop pulling gun on unarmed teen during traffic stop
"Another prominent legal expert shared that view."
Former U.S. Acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal tweeted “Most significant thing is Alito and Thomas were only ones to dissent. Bodes well for the future and the Texas Judge’s restrictions and those of the Court of Appeals not being upheld, should this case ever reach SCOTUS.”
Watch the video below or click here.
CNN 04 21 2023 19 05 43 www.youtube.com
Report typos and corrections to corrections@rawstory.com.
For customer support contact support@rawstory.com.
