In a recent ruling, a federal judge in Hawaii found that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration unlawfully restricted access to mifepristone, a medication used for abortions and miscarriage management. The court determined the FDA violated the law by failing to provide a justified explanation for maintaining its restrictions, which include special certifications for prescribers and pharmacies. The ACLU, which brought the lawsuit, argued that the restrictions disproportionately impact patients with limited healthcare access, highlighting the medication’s safety and effectiveness. Although the FDA is instructed to reconsider its stance, the restrictions currently remain in place as the case navigates ongoing political pressures surrounding the medication.
Read More
The FDA has approved another generic version of the abortion pill mifepristone, a routine regulatory step. This approval, announced by Evita Solutions, immediately drew criticism from anti-abortion groups and Republican politicians. Despite the FDA’s assertion of limited discretion in generic drug approvals and statements on the safety and efficacy of the drug, some conservatives have expressed concern. The approval of this additional generic version is unlikely to affect access to the drug, which is typically taken in combination with misoprostol, though access to the medication is already restricted in many states.
Read More
The FDA recently approved a request to manufacture a generic version of mifepristone, a drug used in medication abortions, which has drawn sharp criticism from anti-abortion advocates. This approval allows Evita Solutions to produce its version of the drug, despite ongoing efforts to restrict access to mifepristone since the overturning of Roe v Wade. Critics, including some politicians and anti-abortion groups, have expressed outrage and questioned the FDA’s decision, citing safety concerns and recent studies. However, abortion rights supporters and medical professionals maintain that mifepristone is safe and effective, pointing to numerous studies supporting its use.
Read More
US Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has directed the FDA to review mifepristone regulations based on new data from a flawed, non-peer-reviewed analysis. This analysis, promoted by anti-abortion groups, alleges higher complication rates than previously known, prompting calls to reinstate prior restrictions or remove the drug entirely. The data significantly overstates risks, including misclassifying ectopic pregnancies as complications of mifepristone. Anti-abortion groups intend to use this analysis to pressure the FDA and lawmakers to severely limit mifepristone access, potentially through ending telemedicine prescriptions as a first step. Despite over 100 studies confirming mifepristone’s safety and effectiveness, this campaign aims to significantly restrict access to the abortion pill.
Read More
Trump’s decision to continue the Biden administration’s defense of mifepristone, the abortion drug, is a surprising yet consistent move. His previous statements indicating no intention to ban or restrict the drug align with this ongoing legal battle. The legal fight itself, however, continues to be fraught with uncertainty, particularly given the persistent challenges from Republican-led states like Missouri, Kansas, and Idaho.
The Supreme Court’s rejection of an earlier attempt to restrict access to mifepristone, citing a lack of standing by the plaintiffs, initially seemed to settle the matter. However, a Trump-appointed judge, Matthew Kacsmaryk, allowed these states to intervene, prolonging the legal battle.… Continue reading
Medication abortion, a two-step process using mifepristone and misoprostol, constitutes over half of all US abortions and is increasingly vital due to abortion restrictions. Highly effective before ten weeks of pregnancy, mifepristone’s access has become fiercely contested since the overturning of Roe v. Wade. Recent legal challenges to the drug’s availability were dismissed by the Supreme Court due to the plaintiffs lacking legal standing. This ruling, however, does not guarantee continued nationwide access to the drug.
Read More
Dr. Margaret Carpenter, her company Nightingale Medical, and the mother of a minor are facing felony charges in Louisiana for allegedly procuring an abortion via mifepristone. The drug, mailed from New York to Louisiana, reportedly caused a medical emergency resulting in the termination of the minor’s pregnancy. This indictment marks a novel legal challenge following the overturning of Roe v. Wade, testing the limits of interstate abortion regulations. Prosecutors allege the actions constitute criminal abortion, highlighting the ongoing legal battles surrounding abortion access in the post-Roe era.
Read More
Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk ruled that Idaho, Kansas, and Missouri can proceed with a lawsuit aiming to restrict access to mifepristone. The states seek to limit telehealth prescriptions, shorten the gestational limit for use, and mandate in-person visits, arguing these measures are necessary to uphold state abortion laws. The ACLU criticized the decision, viewing it as an attack on medication abortion. This case follows a previous ruling by Kacsmaryk against mifepristone and comes amidst ongoing efforts by multiple states to further restrict access to abortion pills. The outcome could significantly impact abortion access nationwide.
Read More
A new lawsuit has been filed against the state of Louisiana, challenging a law that categorizes abortion medications as controlled dangerous substances. The state is the first to classify mifepristone and misoprostol, both used for medication abortions, as “Schedule IV” drugs alongside certain stimulants, sedatives, and opioids. Doctors in Louisiana require a special license to prescribe the medicines, and hospitals must store the pills securely. The suit, filed by a group of healthcare providers, reproductive rights advocates, and a doula practice, argues that this law creates barriers for healthcare workers who need to quickly administer these pills in emergencies. Critics of the legislation argue that it aims to limit access to abortions, rather than prevent misuse of the drugs.
Read More
I can hardly wrap my head around the recent arguments presented by the Missouri Attorney General regarding the abortion pill and its impact on teen pregnancies. To say they’re bizarre would be an understatement. The assertion that the availability of mifepristone will somehow harm the state by lowering teen pregnancies is a perplexing dive into a kind of logic that is hard to comprehend. It’s shocking to see a political figure arguing in favor of more pregnant teens as if that’s the solution to some ill-defined crisis. What are they thinking?
The argument seems to boil down to a starkly utilitarian view of women—they’re seen as vessels for reproduction rather than individuals with agency and rights.… Continue reading
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood