A Republican-appointed federal judge in Texas issued an order suspending the US government’s decades-old approval of a key drug used in medication abortion, initiating a process that could block access to the pill nationwide in a week.
But his order Friday was almost immediately contradicted by a Democratic-appointed judge in Washington state who affirmed the US Food and Drug Administration’s approval of mifepristone and blocked the government from restricting access.
The competing orders just minutes apart signal the issue is almost certainly bound for the US Supreme Court, potentially setting up another politically seismic ruling a year after the high court’s conservative majority overturned Roe v. Wade.
The decision out of Texas from US District Judge
Kacsmaryk’s order will not go into effect for seven days, giving the
The Justice Department, which argued the FDA’s approval was proper and that the pill has been proved safe, filed a notice of appeal late Friday. Attorney General
Possible ‘Chaos’
“Presumably, someone has to rule by next Friday, or else Saturday we have chaos,” he said.
The ruling in Washington came from US District Judge
Both decisions are sure to further elevate abortion access as a potent political issue heading into the the 2024 US elections. Medication abortion has become the most common method in the country as states across the nation grapple with how to legislate reproductive rights during the past year.
The initial plan for Democrats who control the Senate is to fight the Texas decision in the courts, Senate Majority Leader
“We will fight this in the courts and we will work right alongside the administration to pursue every avenue available to make sure women in this country can make their own health care decisions for themselves,” Murray said.
Vice President
Religious groups and anti-abortion advocates targeted the FDA in a November lawsuit in Texas claiming the agency fast-tracked approval of mifepristone in 2000 without sufficient scientific evidence.
Safer Than Tylenol
Medical groups have defended the medication, arguing that studies show it is safer than Tylenol and Viagra and sends fewer people to the emergency room than those drugs. Abortion rights supporters have decried the lawsuit as politically motivated and not based in science.
Kacsmaryk, who sits in Amarillo, Texas, said it was clear that the FDA overstepped its authority when it first approved mifepristone for use and suggested that the agency “faced significant political pressure” to advance the drug.
“The Court does not second-guess FDA’s decision-making lightly,” Kacsmaryk said in his decision. “But here, FDA acquiesced on its legitimate safety concerns — in violation of its statutory duty — based on plainly unsound reasoning and studies that did not support its conclusions.”
The judge said the FDA’s stance had likely led to death and injury among women taking the drug. “Whatever the numbers are, they likely would be considerably lower had FDA not acquiesced to the pressure to increase access to chemical abortion at the expense of women’s safety,” Kacsmaryk wrote.
If the ruling is not blocked by the 5th Circuit, women seeking to end pregnancies will be left with two options: surgical abortion or a single pill called misoprostol, which is less effective when not used in combination with mifepristone. The latest data shows that 98% of medication abortions that occur in the US use the two-pill method, according to the
Evan Masingill, the chief executive officer of
The high-profile Amarillo case has drawn focus from advocates on both sides of the issue, as well as health professionals and medical associations who have been bracing for a ruling on the temporary order for weeks. Dozens of states and advocacy organizations have filed briefs with the court, arguing for or against the order.
The abortion pill ruling isn’t Kacsmaryk’s final word on the case, with many court filings and a possible trial to come. But the injunction reflects his judgment that the plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits, among other factors.
Texas Judge
Anti-abortion groups expected Kacsmaryk to be favorable to their case. Lawyers for the conservative religious-rights groups suing FDA chose to sue in Amarillo, where they were all but assured to get Kacsmaryk, who is assigned all civil and criminal cases.
In December, Kacsmaryk tossed out a federal rule that aimed to expand teen access to birth control. In November, he rejected a federal policy that stopped doctors from discriminating against people based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.
The conservative group behind the lawsuit argues that the agency didn’t follow the appropriate protocol when it first authorized the use of mifepristone in 2000 and failed to study the safety of the drugs as required, putting “politics over science.”
FDA officials have refuted that characterization in public statements and court filings, arguing that the agency followed procedure when approving the medication and “extensively reviewed” the scientific evidence at hand to determine its safety and efficacy.
Mifepristone was first approved in 2000 for use through the first seven weeks of pregnancy. In 2016, the FDA extended that window to 10 weeks. It is the first pill used in the two-drug regimen most used to terminate a pregnancy and blocks a hormone called progesterone that is needed to support a pregnancy. It is followed by misoprostol, which prompts contractions that expel the contents of the uterus.
Kacsmaryk’s decision comes as the federal government has taken steps to loosen restrictions on abortion pills, allowing authorized pharmacies to dispense the pills instead of limiting their distribution to doctor’s offices. But Republican leaders of states with abortion restrictions have push backed against the new regulations, filing lawsuits and drafting letters to major drugstore chains to ensure the drugs cannot be dispensed at stores in their states or mailed to their residents.
The case is Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. US Food and Drug Administration, 2:22-cv-00223, US District Court, Northern District of Texas (Amarillo).
(Updates with comments from Senate Democrats in paragraphs 11-12, Harris in paragraph 13.)
--With assistance from
To contact the reporter on this story:
To contact the editors responsible for this story:
Steve Stroth, Ian Fisher
© 2023 Bloomberg L.P. All rights reserved. Used with permission.
Learn more about Bloomberg Law or Log In to keep reading:
See Breaking News in Context
Bloomberg Law provides trusted coverage of current events enhanced with legal analysis.
Already a subscriber?
Log in to keep reading or access research tools and resources.