The Justice Department will take an emergency dispute over medication abortion drugs to the Supreme Court, Attorney General Merrick Garland said Thursday.

Appeals court rules in favor of abortion pill restrictions 05:04. The Justice Department and Danco Laboratories, the maker of mifepristone, asked the Supreme Court in September to overturn the 5th ...

Central to the dispute is the scope of the Food and Drug Administration’s authority to regulate mifepristone, a drug that the medical community has deemed safe and effective.

Sen. Bill Cassidy says reaction to mifepristone dispute is 'totally alarmist' and insists abortion remains a state's rights issue – even as GOP colleagues call for nationwide limits ...

When mifepristone was approved in 2000, it was limited in use to up to seven weeks of pregnancy. It also required three in-person visits and a doctor's supervision.

The central dispute in the case is whether the Food and Drug Administration overlooked serious safety problems when it made mifepristone easier to obtain, including through mail-order pharmacies.

The Supreme Court agreed on Wednesday to take up a dispute over a medication used in the most common method of abortion in the United States, its first abortion case since it overturned Roe v ...

Today the Supreme Court held that anti-abortion doctors lack standing to challenge the Food and Drug Administration's regulations governing mifepristone. This was as expected. Justice Kavanaugh ...

The central dispute in the case is whether the Food and Drug Administration overlooked serious safety problems when it made mifepristone easier to obtain, including through mail-order pharmacies.

The central dispute in the case is whether the Food and Drug Administration overlooked serious safety problems when it made mifepristone easier to obtain, including through mail-order pharmacies.

Central to the dispute is the scope of the Food and Drug Administration’s authority to regulate mifepristone, a drug that the medical community has deemed safe and effective.

The central dispute in the case is whether the Food and Drug Administration overlooked serious safety problems when it made mifepristone easier to obtain, including through mail-order pharmacies.