In the wake of the Dobbs Supreme Court decisions, states across the nation have experienced an influx of lawsuits trying to push against new restrictions and bans. Central to these efforts have been lawsuits targeting the distribution and accessibility of the abortion pill, mifepristone. The pill, which has been approved by the FDA “...can only be prescribed by certified providers who understand how the drug works and agree to look out for potential complications or medical conditions such as an ectopic pregnancy, which requires immediate medical attention. But the FDA also says mifepristone is safe enough to be provided via telehealth appointments and mailed to a patient without evaluating them in person.”
However, despite this federal regulation, many states, including North Carolina and West Virginia, have placed restrictions and bans on the drug. The manufacturer of the drug, GenBioPro, has challenged West Virginia’s restrictions, and in North Carolina, Dr. Amy Bryant challenged the state’s law as well. Both suits pursue similar discrepancies, arguing that the state laws limiting or banning mifepristone are preempted by federal law. Bryant’s lawsuit articulates how state law has infringed on federal regulation by stating that the FDA used its jurisdiction “to impose a precise set of controls on an FDA-approved drug, a State may not impose additional controls—including restrictions that FDA has specifically rejected—that upset the carefully balanced regulatory scheme established by federal law.”
If these lawsuits were successful, they may open up avenues for abortion access to be maintained through medical abortions such as mifepristone, which make up a majority of abortions. Although these two suits seek only to suspend the laws in their respective states, they may encourage similar suits to be leveled against states across the nation. Despite these efforts, however, lawsuits are also being raised on the opposing side, instead targeting the FDA’s approval of the drug from 2000. Groups filing against the drug also claim that the initial approval of mifepristone was unconstitutional, and extended beyond the FDA’s powers.
While only the start of the various legal battles that are certain to arise in a post-Roe world, these lawsuits have begun to set the precedent for how abortion policy will be negotiated and cemented across the nations. With the Dobbs decision shifting considerable power to the states to decide on abortion regulations, much is still up in the air regarding the interpretations and constitutionality of the new laws set in place. Lawsuits such as GenBioPro and Dr. Bryant’s have started to help define how people will find access to safe legal abortions across the nation.
Sources:
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/north-carolina-doctor-sues-abortion-pill-access-test/story?id=96634916
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/01/25/abortion-pills-lawsuits-00079396
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/25/health/abortion-pills-ban-genbiopro.html
4 comments:
Over the 2 1/2 centuries over the United States' existence, there have been many battle over the jurisdiction of states v. the federal government's jurisdiction. The battle over mifepristone clearly seems to be shaping up to be one of these battles, and could potentially end up in the Supreme Court. However, the issue is highly complicated, as what occurs when a resident of a state where mifepristone is illegal receives mifepristone in the mail from a state where it is legal (where it would likely fall under interstate commerce), or what happens if their residents leave their state to get the drug? There are few precedents for this situation, so these upcoming court cases will greatly shape policy surrounding mifepristone and pharmaceutical drugs as a whole for years to come.
Telehealth and mail delivery of abortion pills like mifepristone provide greater access to safe and legal abortions. This can be especially beneficial for people living in rural or remote areas where access to healthcare is limited. Furthermore, telehealth appointments reduce the need for in-person visits, making the process more convenient and less time-consuming. Mail delivery eliminates the need for patients to physically go to a provider, reducing barriers such as transportation and time off work. Allowing mifepristone to be delivered through telehealth and mail also increases privacy and confidentiality for patients, as they can access the medication in the comfort and safety of their own homes. Thus, when states block telehealth and mail delivery abortion pills they force people to find alternate solutions that are often more dangerous and costly.
I thought that Andrew's point was really interesting so I did some more research on it. It turns out that a resident of a state where mifepristone is illegal can still receive the pill via mail from a state where it's legal.
In addition to abortion, mifepristone can be used to help treat gastric ulcers and manage miscarriages. The Justice Department claims that when mifepristone is sent via mail, the United States Postal Office doesn't know what the recipient of the pill plans to use it for. Because of this, it's not fair to assume that the recipient of the pill will use it illegally.
However, many anti-abortionists are against the Justice Department's legal opinion, and have continued to implement restrictions and bans in regards to abortion pills. Further presidential administrations can revoke the legal opinion so it'll be interesting to see what will happen with abortion pills during the next election.
https://www.justice.gov/olc/opinion/file/1560596/download
I agree with what everyone has said so far. I agree that banning this abortion drug will lead to more dangerous avenues and people going to other states to either have an abortion or gain access to this drug. In addition, it isn't just in these two states where it is being banned. Republican attorney generals in 20 started have reached out to CVS and Walgreens saying that they could face legal consequences if they continue to sell abortion pill. General Attorney Andrew Bailey said that the sale of abortion pills would violate federal law and abortion laws in many states. The letter also said that Biden's administration advocacy for abortion pills by mail was "an attempt to circumvent the right of states to protect women and children." There is also the issue of the other drug that is used for abortion in tandem with mifepristone, misoprostol . How does this ban affect this drug and can people still gain access to these drugs through telehealth or other ways.
https://fox2now.com/news/missouri/missouri-ag-challenges-cvs-walgreens-over-mailing-of-abortion-pills/
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2023/01/17/1140778856/with-telehealth-abortion-doctors-have-to-learn-to-trust-and-empower-patients
Post a Comment