Enlarge / Demonstrators participate in an abortion-rights rally outside the Supreme Court as the justices of the court hear oral arguments in the case of the US Food and Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine on March 26, 2024 in Washington, DC. (credit: Getty | Anna Moneymaker )

The US Supreme Court on Tuesday heard arguments in a case seeking to limit access to the abortion and miscarriage drug mifepristone, with a majority of justices expressing skepticism that the anti-abortion groups that brought the case have the legal standing to do so.

The case threatens to dramatically alter access to a drug that has been safely used for decades and, according to the Guttmacher Institute, was used in 63 percent of abortions documented in the health care system in 2023 . But, it also has sweeping implications for the Food and Drug Administration's authority over drugs, marking the first time that courts have second-guessed the agency's expert scientific analysis and moved to restrict access to an FDA-approved drug.

As such, the case has rattled health experts, reproductive health care advocates, the FDA, and the pharmaceutical industry alike. But, based on the line of questioning in today's oral arguments, they have reason to breathe a sigh of relief.

Enlarge (credit: Zach Gibson/Getty Images)

Three landmark Supreme Court decisions in 2022 have each been widely criticized by health experts as threats to public health, but a study released Thursday in JAMA Network Open modeled their collective toll. The study found that, by conservative estimates, the decisions will lead to thousands of deaths in the coming years, with tens of thousands more being harmed.

The three decisions included: one from January 13, 2022, that invalidated some COVID-19 workplace protections ( National Federation of Independent Business v Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) ); one on June 23, 2022, that voided some state laws restricting handgun carry ( New York State Rifle and Pistol Association Inc v Superintendent of New York State Police (Bruen) ); and one on June 24, 2022, that revoked the constitutional right to abortion ( Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization ).

A group of health researchers, led by Adam Gaffney at Harvard University, modeled how these decisions would impact Americans' morbidity and mortality in the near future.

Enlarge (credit: Charles McQuillan / Stringer | Getty Images News )

For the first time since Roe v. Wade was overturned, there's a clear example showing exactly how Facebook will react to law enforcement requests for abortion data without user consent.

Forbes reports that a 17-year-old named Celeste Burgess in Nebraska had her Facebook messages subpoenaed by detective Ben McBride, who suspected that Burgess' reported stillborn birth was a medication abortion. In the officer's affidavit , he explains that he asked that Meta not notify the teen of the request for her Facebook data because she might tamper with or destroy evidence. Court records show that Meta complied with the logic.

Meta did not immediately respond to Ars' request for comment on this case, but previously, Meta has said that "we notify users (including advertisers) about requests for their information before disclosing it unless we are prohibited by law from doing so or in exceptional circumstances, such as where a child is at risk of harm, emergencies, or when notice would be counterproductive."