Featured Image

(LifeSiteNews) — Kristin Waggoner, CEO and president of the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), joins Jonathon on this week’s episode of The Van Maren Show. They discuss the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to consider the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) approval to send the abortion drug mifepristone to women through the mail (and potentially the drug’s approval by the agency in 2000).

In Waggoner’s mind, the FDA should “answer” for the “damage” that it did to law and order and for putting women in danger by allowing mifepristone to be sent via the mail, which is “putting politics above science.” While she cannot speculate the exact reason why the Supreme Court picked up the case, she hopes that was because it would agree with the ruling of every court that has hitherto heard it – that the FDA acted “unlawfully in removing” safeguards. Waggoner notes that the Supreme Court is expected to deliver its ruling next June; she suspects it will agree with the lower courts.

“What this case is focused on is the Biden administration has created a mail-order abortion scheme, and in doing so, in its zeal to promote abortion drugs, it has ignored the science and has created significant harms to women,” she tells Jonathon, noting that the question in this case is not about the legality of abortion or the limits to abortion on the federal level.

READ: Supreme Court agrees to review pivotal FDA abortion pill case

“I don’t think most Americans understand what this drug does to a woman in terms of creating significant bleeding, inducing labor and delivery, and having those kinds of consequences in an unsupervised, unmanaged manner has created significant risks that are proven in terms of the number of visits to the emergency room, the number of surgical interventions as a result,” she adds.

The ADF president and CEO further maintains that women deserve better than the Biden administration’s attempt to push access to abortion drugs despite state-level restrictions, which appears to advance more of a political agenda than an interest in women’s health. She also notes that a federal agency’s decision to change a rule the way the FDA did warrants a scientific explanation. The lack of scientific evidence in favor of the FDA’s decision, she maintains, not only makes the case “somewhat unprecedented,” but could potentially be the reason the Supreme Court accepted the case.

Waggoner provides a potential timeline for the case’s progress, telling Jonathon that both sides are preparing the record and seeing what should be brought to the court’s attention. In the next couple of months, a briefing schedule will be set where both sides will present arguments, followed by the submission of amicus briefs. The process culminates in oral arguments beginning around March, when the Supreme Court will have the chance to question either side. In the lead-up to the final decision, the media will present narratives about the case in an attempt to influence public opinion, with the ADF defending the truth of the matter in the meantime.

The Van Maren Showis hosted on numerous platforms, including Spotify, SoundCloud, YouTube, iTunes, and Google Play.

For a full listing of episodes, and to subscribe to various channels, visit our Acast webpage here.