Louisiana is asking a federal appeals court to halt Biden-era rules that expanded mail-order access to the abortion pill mifepristone, arguing that the policy is undermining the state’s pro-life laws and allowing an estimated 1,000 illegal abortions every month.

Become a Monthly Ministry Partner today.

View Comments (0)

The legal fight could ultimately return to the Supreme Court, with questions surrounding state sovereignty, abortion-pill safety, and the FDA’s handling of mifepristone all hanging in the balance.

From Just the News:

The Pelican State is seeking what’s known as a 705 stay under the Administrative Procedure Act to pause the 2023 change to mifepristone’s Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy as the case barrels toward SCOTUS for a final determination of whether the FDA adequately studied how loosening mifepristone rules would affect its safety.

The Trump administration has resisted broadsides by pro-life groups and red states to immediately pull the mail-order regulation, citing the FDA’s long-awaited safety review of the pill, which the agency has acknowledged won’t be finished before the midterm elections.

Still, Todd Blanche, as acting attorney general before being confirmed to the post, did tell Congress, “We are not defending what Biden did” in the 2023 REMS, which is “wrong,” and acknowledged Louisiana’s laws are “really what’s being violated here,” Louisiana’s July 29 brief emphasized.

The current dispute follows previous battles over the FDA’s loosening of restrictions on mifepristone. According to the source, the Biden administration permanently eliminated in-person dispensing requirements in 2023, making abortion pills available through the mail. An earlier challenge eventually reached the Supreme Court, which unanimously ruled that the plaintiffs lacked legal standing to challenge the FDA’s actions.

Louisiana is now attempting to establish the kind of injury necessary to bring its own challenge. The state argues that approximately 1,000 abortions are occurring illegally each month through mail-order mifepristone, citing estimates from the abortion-rights Society of Family Planning. Louisiana also argues that it suffers financial harm when Medicaid pays for medical treatment for women who experience complications from the drug.

The three-judge panel wrestled extensively with whether those alleged harms can be traced directly to the FDA. Judges questioned whether the agency itself authorized anyone to illegally ship abortion pills into Louisiana or whether independent actions by prescribers and other third parties break the chain between the federal regulation and the harm claimed by the state.

Safety questions also featured prominently in the hearing. Louisiana argued that the FDA has failed to adequately track complications associated with mifepristone. The source notes that since 2016, prescribers have only been required to report deaths—not other serious adverse events—to the drug’s manufacturer. Louisiana Solicitor General Ben Aguiñaga described this lack of information as significant because women suffering complications may tell emergency room doctors they are experiencing miscarriages without disclosing that they took mifepristone.

Even one of the judges appeared troubled by questions surrounding the available safety data. Judge Priscilla Richman pressed the Justice Department about what level of risk the FDA tolerates for mifepristone compared with other drugs and questioned the government’s position on Louisiana’s legal challenge. Attorneys defending the current rules maintained that mifepristone has a “well-established safety profile” and said its earlier adverse-event rate was consistent with what the FDA anticipated when approving the drug.

The timing of the FDA’s current review is another point of contention. U.S. District Judge David Joseph has given the Justice Department until Oct. 8 to demonstrate that the review is proceeding as expected. Meanwhile, an unnamed Senate Republican staffer told The Washington Sun that there is a sense the White House does not want the review completed until after Election Day.

For intercessors, this case raises profound questions about the protection of unborn life, the ability of states to enforce their own abortion laws, and whether federal agencies are adequately examining the consequences of policies governing abortion pills. As these questions move through the courts, let’s pray for truth to prevail, for judges to exercise wisdom, for women to be protected from harm, and above all for the lives of unborn children.

Share your prayers for the protection of unborn life and wisdom in our courts below.

(Excerpt from Just the News. Photo Credit: Liudmila Chernetska/Getty Images via Canva Business)