The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on the 12th (local time) banning the non-face-to-face prescription of artificial abortion drugs that were enforced in the aftermath of Corona 19. According to a ruling on the artificial abortion (abortion) of the first woman after the appointment of Federal Justice Amy Connie Barrett, it is evaluated that the composition of the Supreme Court of’absolute conservative superiority’ was confirmed.
In order to receive’mifepristone’, which induces spontaneous abortion in the early stages of pregnancy in the United States, you must visit the hospital in person according to the regulations of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). However, in May of last year, the American Civil Liberties Association (ACLU) sued the U.S. FDA, saying that simply visiting the hospital to receive medicine on behalf of the U.S. Obstetrics and Gynecology raises the risk of corona19 infection to patients and doctors.
Judge Theodore Juan of Maryland’s Federal District Court raised the hand of ACLU in July of last year, and made it possible to receive prescriptions for mifepristone by mail or delivery after telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic nationwide.
The Trump administration appealed, and eventually a ruling was issued to restore the existing FDA action.
According to US local media, the US Supreme Court ruled in this way, 6 to 3, but Supreme Court Justice John Roberts, who ruled a conservative non-face-to-face ban, said, “This ruling is not about women’s right to artificial abortion.” Based on its own judgment on the aftermath of Corona 19, it was considered whether the decision of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) could be changed.”
Progressive Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elina Kagan, who gave minor opinions, said, “This country’s law has made it more difficult by taking abortion surgery instead of other more dangerous medical procedures.” He criticized that it not only treats Gulf as an exception, but also imposes unnecessary and unjustified burdens on those who want to exercise women’s options.” He added that the next administration should review the measure.
◇Confirmation of ‘6 vs. 3’compensation advantage… Shall I grab Biden’s ankle?
Currently, six of the nine federal justices are classified as conservative and three as progressive. In particular, since the start of President Trump’s tenure, three conservative Supreme Court Justices have been appointed, creating a conservative superiority system of ‘6 vs. 3’.
In this ruling, all the conservative Supreme Court Justices raised the hands of the Trump administration. Politico, a political media outlet, commented on the ruling that it was “six to three according to the ideological line.”
The abortion issue is one of the sharpest political issues in the United States. When Supreme Court Justice Barrett was appointed, the local media also highlighted Barrett’s “anti-abortionist” character. Law Professor Steve Vladek told CNN that the important implication of today’s ruling is that the new conservative superiority Supreme Court has shown how to approach the abortion ruling in the future.
As seen in this ruling, the conservative superior court could put a heavy burden on the Biden administration, which has a week left behind. This is because it can put a strong brake on the progressive policies of the Biden administration.
In December of last year, the Associated Press said, “President Trump appointed not only three Supreme Court Justices, but 30% of the judges of the Court of Appeals who judge most cases.” “The true measure of what President Trump has been doing will be revealed in numerous court rulings, including abortion, firearms and religious rights.”
Professor Jeong-Geon Seo of Kyung Hee University said, “Even if Biden’s climate change policy passes through the Senate and House, conservative organizations can file unconstitutional lawsuits due to procedural defects or conflict with existing laws. Even without it, we can make a decision unconstitutional.” It is said that climate change and health care policies that the Biden administration has professed to pursue could be frustrated or delayed by being caught on the threshold of the court.
Reporter Seok Kyung-min [email protected]