“The court found unanimously that the group of anti-abortion doctors who questioned the Food and Drug Administration’s decisions making it easier to access the pill did not have legal standing to sue.”
#####################
OK, then who DOES have legal standing to sue?
What do you want to bet that these doctors bringing this suit won't soon be forced to prescribe these abortion pills.
This decision is actually a lot better than it seems at first. The left has abused “standing” with lawfare and this decision greatly limits the concept of “who has standing” for the future. The ACLU should be worried.
My guess is that this ruling is in keeping with the Dobbs decision, in that it is a state’s issue as it deals with all forms of abortion, not the Federal Government. Which is why they heard the case, to make it their official stance as a reinforcement on the issue of abortion in whatever form is presented. From now on the standing ruling sets the precedence for all forms of abortion, and any cases brought forth will rule standing as the reason for rejecting hearing future cases on the abortion issue.
SCOTUS issued opinions on three cases today. This one and two others. Still nothing on Fischer, bump stock ban, Chevron, or Presidential immunity. I believe we are still waiting on opinions for 27 cases that are remaining for this term.
Another opinion day is scheduled for tomorrow at 10:00 a.m.
Same thing happened in November 2020.
Conservatives who lawfully voted in their home state discovered they had no standing to challenge election fraud.
Same thing happened again after 2021.
Conservatives who demanded that long established immigration laws be enforced in their home states discovered they had no standing to compel the Executive Branch to do anything.
Artful dodge.