Red states can pick up the legal fight against mifepristone, judge rules
3 min read
Mifepristone, the first medication in a medical abortion, is prepared for a patient at Alamo Women's Clinic in Carbondale, Illinois, U.S., April 20, 2023. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein/File Photo
A federal judge ruled on Thursday that the states of Missouri, Kansas, and Idaho can proceed with their lawsuit to limit access to the abortion drug mifepristone. This decision comes months after the U.S. Supreme Court rejected an earlier version of the legal challenge, which had been filed by private anti-abortion activists. The ruling allows these GOP-led states to pick up where the activists left off after the Supreme Court determined they lacked standing to bring the case forward.
Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, a Donald Trump appointee, approved the amended lawsuit, which argues that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has taken actions that facilitate the distribution of mifepristone across state lines. The states involved claim that these FDA decisions undermine their own restrictions on abortion. For example, Idaho has a near-total abortion ban, while Kansas and Missouri have introduced significant restrictions on medication abortion, even though voters in those states have approved measures protecting abortion rights.
The lawsuit challenges FDA policies that have allowed mifepristone to be mailed without requiring an in-person doctor’s visit, as well as the approval of a generic version of the drug. The states also object to other changes in the way the drug can be prescribed, which have occurred over recent years. In his ruling, Kacsmaryk dismissed arguments from those defending the FDA’s policies, who contended that his court in Amarillo, Texas, was not an appropriate venue for this case because the states’ claims had no direct connection to the district. However, Kacsmaryk indicated he would address these arguments more thoroughly during the next phase of the case, which will allow the FDA’s defenders, including the mifepristone manufacturer Danco, to seek dismissal of the lawsuit.
The timing of Kacsmaryk’s decision is notable, as it comes just days before the inauguration of the new administration. This means that the Trump administration’s Department of Justice will oversee the next phase of the legal proceedings, rather than the incoming Biden administration, which has defended the FDA’s approach to mifepristone in the Supreme Court. The Biden administration had argued last year that the FDA’s regulatory decisions regarding the drug were consistent with its authority.
The Trump transition team did not respond to CNN’s inquiry regarding how they would approach the case. Pam Bondi, the attorney general nominee, was asked about the Department of Justice’s stance on defending the FDA’s regulations during her Senate confirmation hearing. She stated that she needed more time to research the issue but promised that her personal anti-abortion views would not influence her actions if confirmed as attorney general.
The decision to file the lawsuit in Amarillo has sparked allegations of judge-shopping. Kacsmaryk is often assigned cases in this district, and critics point out that he worked for a legal advocacy organization with a strong focus on social conservative causes before being appointed to the bench. In 2023, Kacsmaryk issued a controversial ruling in which he declared that the FDA’s decades-old approval of mifepristone should be revoked entirely. This decision was later reversed by higher courts, but it highlighted the judge’s willingness to make far-reaching decisions regarding abortion-related matters.
The legal battle over mifepristone has become a focal point in the broader debate over abortion access in the United States. The drug is one of the most widely used methods for medication abortions, and any changes to its availability could have significant consequences for women’s access to reproductive healthcare. The outcome of this case, which will likely continue for months, could have far-reaching implications not only for the states involved but also for the future of abortion rights nationwide.
As the lawsuit progresses, the legal fight over mifepristone will likely continue to attract national attention, particularly as it involves state laws in conflict with federal regulations. The case is set to continue unfolding in a courtroom that has already been at the center of controversy, and its eventual outcome could set important precedents in the ongoing legal battles surrounding abortion access in the United States.
About The Author
