Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl

The Supreme Court is facing a self-imposed Friday night deadline to decide whether women’s access to a widely used abortion pill will stay unchanged or be restricted while a legal challenge to its Food and Drug Administration approval goes on. The justices are weighing arguments that allowing restrictions contained in lower-court rulings to take effect would severely disrupt the availability of the drug, mifepristone, which is used in the most common abortion method in the United States. (Sherman, 4/21)

A decision on the future of the abortion pill mifepristone is expected Friday unless the United States Supreme Court orders a second extension for a ruling. ... The president of the American Medical Association spoke with 7News Health and Wellness Reporter Victoria Sanchez via Zoom on Thursday. (Sanchez, 4/21)

Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News: Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News' 'What the Health?': Will They Or Won’t They (Block The Abortion Pill)? 

Supreme Court justices could act at any moment on access to the abortion pill mifepristone. Beyond reproductive health, their ruling could carry significant implications for states’ rights and FDA independence and integrity. For now, though, observers are unsure what the court will do — or what exactly prompted justices to again delay their decision this week. (4/20)

Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek said Thursday she has directed the state to obtain a supply of the most commonly used abortion medication in the U.S. amid fears that a court ruling could restrict access to it. The Democratic governor said regardless of the court’s decision about mifepristone’s availability, patients in Oregon will have access to it for years. (4/21)

As the Supreme Court weighs the future of mifepristone, a key abortion drug used for terminating early pregnancies, the threat of restricting its use has also put the spotlight on a second medication, misoprostol. It is used in conjunction with mifepristone in the United States to terminate pregnancies and should remain widely available, for now, no matter how the court rules on mifepristone. Here’s what to know about misoprostol, and whether its use as an abortion drug may be at risk. (Masih, 4/20)

A group in Europe that prescribes abortion pills to people in the U.S. online said it has seen a surge in requests since a federal judge in Texas issued a decision imperiling future access to mifepristone. "We have seen an enormous ... increase in requests since the ruling in Texas," said Dr. Rebecca Gomperts, a Dutch physician who runs the service called Aid Access. "People are extremely anxious." (Da Silva, 4/20)

A new state health department rule will add red-tape for Montanans seeking to use their Medicaid benefits to cover abortions, a long-debated policy the state’s Republican administration has said is a proper and legal restriction on state funds. The proposed rule to tighten reporting standards and require pre-authorization for coverage was first introduced near the end of December. Abortion rights advocates, medical providers and Medicaid recipients have protested the change, arguing that the state’s current policy for covering medically necessary abortions helps maintain health care access for low-income Montanans. (Silvers, 4/19)

Wyoming’s first full-service abortion clinic in years defiantly opened Thursday nearly one year after an arson attack ravaged it and despite looming laws that could shut it down with some of the toughest abortion restrictions in the U.S. The clinic in a small stucco building on a busy street in Wyoming’s second-biggest city of Casper is less than a mile (1.6 kilometers) from Interstate 25, where the occasional anti-abortion billboard stands against the open, sparsely populated landscape. (Gruver, /20)

In the more than 20 years since the inception of a state law that allows new parents to leave newborns they can’t care for at emergency rooms without fear of criminal charges, 52 babies have been relinquished at Connecticut hospitals across the state. Connecticut’s SAFE Havens Act was enacted in 2001. Every state in the country has a version of this law, and Texas passed the first one in 1999. The laws aim to prevent cases of infant abandonment in which babies are left in trash cans or outside. (Monk, 4/20)