CONFLICTING ABORTION PILL RULINGS

The nation has been eagerly watching a pending court case in Texas in which The Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, et al. challenged the FDA’s approval of the chemical abortion pill; a move which, if successful, would mean a nationwide ban of the chemical abortion pill regimen.

In a separate and less publicized court case from Washington state, a federal judge was also weighing merits in a case brought by 12 states regarding access to chemical abortion.

Both federal judges issued their rulings this evening. The Texas judge ruled that the FDA cannot allow chemical abortion to be prescribed via telemedicine or without an in-person doctor’s visit, while the Washington judge ruled that the FDA must continue providing the abortion pill in accordance with the Biden-era rule changes.

What Does This Mean?

While the ruling in the Washington case technically only applies to 12 states, it still stands in direct conflict with the Texas ruling. With two rulings that directly contradict with each other, it is certain that this issue will be resolved by the United States Supreme Court. Keeping in mind this is the same Supreme Court which, just last summer, overturned Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton in a historic single blow.

The Texas ruling goes into effect in 7 days, giving the Biden Administration time to file for an emergency hearing seeking an injunction (a temporary ‘hold’ on the decision while the case proceeds) with SCOTUS. It is likely that SCOTUS will lean heavily on the arguments and findings from the Texas case ahead of any decision to provide a temporary injunction while appeals are made in both cases.

What Exactly WAS The Texas Challenge?

The plaintiffs, represented by The Alliance Defending Freedom, argue that the FDA unlawfully fast-tracked the approval and never studied the safety of the drugs under the labeled condition for use. The FDA characterized pregnancy as an “illness” and never studied the safety of the drugs for use in abortions. The FDA’s approval of mifepristone and misoprostol’s use for abortions should be reversed, according to the complaint.

“To date, the FDA’s review, approval, and deregulation of chemical abortion drugs has spanned three decades, correlated with four U.S. presidential elections, and encompassed six discrete agency actions. Plaintiffs challenge these six FDA actions and ask that the Court hold them unlawful, set them aside, and vacate them.” Case no. 2:22-cv-00223-Z, Complaint, p. 2