process is underway. that s going to the fifth circuit what some believe to be one of the most conservative appeals circuit courts across the country now, of course, so the administration is basically going to be having to answer what comes next. what they ll do , just in case that medication is not put on a stay during that appeals process, and that medication is now off the market or will be off the market after that week long pulse, all right, jasmine. and right. nice to see you this morning. thank you for walking us through that. let s bring in julian s elessar, cnn political analyst and historian and professor at princeton university. good morning, julian. so um, jasmine laid it out there. how might the supreme court rule on these conflicting decisions? and what does it mean for the fda approval process, and i guess more broadly reproductive rights. well in terms of the court, the highest court we don t know. obviously the dobbs decision sets a precedent that creates considerable
for good public health policy to allow courts and politicians to tell the fda what it should do. reporter: the judge appointed by president trump issued a 67-page opinion, asserting the fda s approval 23 years ago violated a federal rule because the drug wasn t properly tested . the ruling could limit abortion access even for women in states where the procedure is legal. anti-abortion advocates are pleased with the decision. we are encouraged the judiciary is ftaking a look at the approval of mifepristone and holding the fda to account. reporter: federal judge thomas rice, appointed by obama, blocked the fda from making any changes to mifepristone s availability in 17 democrat-led states. mifepristone is one of two approved pills used in more than half of legal abortions in the country. the outcome in this case may undermine the fda approval
people don t know that. actually there are more abortions done now with the pills, then done surgically. let s take a look at how this increased over the years so since 2020 it s gone up and up and up to the point now where more than 53% of abortions in the u. s are done with pills or medication abortions, and let s take a look at some of the side effects. you know, drugs have side effects when we look at deadly side effects for every million women who have used medford kristen, there have been 20 deaths. if you look at penicillin, if you look at viagra, it s many more for penicillin. it s 20 deaths per million users for viagra s 49 deaths per million users, so actually when you look at deadly side effects, the medford price stone is safer than many other drugs. not just these two. victor amra. elizabeth could you talk about you know how this ruling could have long term impacts on the trust in the fda approval process? yes there is a lot of trust in the fda approval
because what this judge has done is said that the kind of approval that the fda fda allowed for medication abortions , which are still legal in many states across the country, despite how the supreme court ruled in june, people would not have access to this drug if this ruling becomes permanent nationwide, seven days, the department of justice has to appeal the ruling on behalf of the food and drug administration to go to the fifth circuit. which is a pretty conservative court, but probably not as conservative as this judge who was specifically chosen by the challengers, the challengers opponents to abortion rights had sought out this judge knowing his background, hoping to get a ruling just like this critical of the fda approval process, which is, i said, dates back decades now. and but the judge said that the fda had not adequately considered the public health benefits safety of the
after republican-led states threatened to sue. in this case the plaintiffs are arguing the drug is unsafe and the fda approval process was flawed. mainstream medical groups saying the plaintiffs used misleading information in the filing and the drug company s attorney says serious side effects occur in less than 1% of patients with the risk of death nonexistent. the women s march and other advocacy groups say the plaintiffs went judge shopping to find someone that they believe will rule in their favor. by filing the case in amarillo where there is one federal judge, a president trump appointee who went from working at a religious liberty law firm on anti-abortion advocacy to the federal bench. it would be unprecedented for a single judge to say the fda got it wrong 20 years ago. there has never been an instance where everyone has overturned a ruling by the fda pr.