State attorneys general sued the Biden administration over abortion pill rules

Mifepristone is a Certified Pharmacy and Its Importance to Protect Birth Control and Pregnancy after the U.S. Supreme Court Decision

“We intend to be a certified pharmacy and will distribute Mifepristone only in those jurisdictions where it is legal and operationally feasible,” the company said in a statement.

The Supreme Court’s decision last year to overturn the abortion ban in the U.S. has made medication abortion a particular flashpoint in the current debate.

Laws vary by state, but the medications can be taken up to 11 weeks after the first day of the last menstrual period. Telehealth prescriptions are an option in some states, or a person could travel to a state where abortion is legal to get the pills.

More than half of abortions in the US are using medication in 2020, more than surgical procedures, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

“Because there are manifold ways in which recipients in every state may lawfully use such drugs, including to produce an abortion, the mere mailing of such drugs to a particular jurisdiction is an insufficient basis for concluding that the sender intends them to be used unlawfully,” the opinion added.

In the wake of the Supreme Court ruling, Attorney General Merrick Garland issued a statement promising to work with the FDA and other federal agencies to protect access to such drugs, which some states have sought to ban.

The change could make it easier to purchase medicine in stores and online. Women can get a prescription via telehealth consultation with a health professional, and then receive the pills through the mail, where permitted by law.

True, parts of it may violate the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of speech, and the law’s provisions on contraception obviously contradict Supreme Court rulings protecting birth control. But the law’s provisions on abortion face no obstacles (and the Supreme Court’s willingness to protect birth control is certainly in question if the Court consistently applies the test it laid out in its decision last summer overruling Roe v. Wade).

Two drugmakers that make brand-name and generic versions of abortion pills requested the latest FDA label update. Agency rules require a company to file an application before changing restrictions on drugs.

In a medication abortion, mifepristone is used with another drug called misoprostol to end a pregnancy. The hormones that are needed for a pregnant female to continue are blocked by mifepristone. The drug is already distributed by the pharmacy.

There are rare consequences of bleeding, though it is a common side effect. The FDA says more than 3.7 million U.S. women have used mifepristone since its approval.

Several FDA-mandated safety requirements remain in effect, including training requirements to certify that prescribers can provide emergency care in the case of excessive bleeding. A certification is required for a pharmacy that gives the pills.

It’s not clear which other pharmacies will seek certification or what impact it will have on abortion access in places where it’s banned or restricted.

Walgreens responded to NPR’s latest request for comment by pointing to a statement it published on Monday, reiterating that it was waiting on FDA certification to dispense mifepristone “consistent with federal and state laws.”

Honeybee Health posted on its verified Facebook page Tuesday that it has officially become the first pharmacy certified to provide medication abortion.

It takes time to review and make a decision on whether or not to take the certification process.

Dollars for Life: The Fall of the Republican Establishment and the Rise of the Comstock Act to Prohibit Abortion in Blue States

Whether states can enforce restrictive abortion laws against people who “provide, facilitate access to, or obtain medication abortion” to someone in another state or within a state depends in part on a doctrine known as preemption, under which a state law that undermines the purpose or objectives of federal law cannot be enforced, Litman said.

We don’t believe that anyone should be forced to travel in a certain way, and so we are looking into the question of how lawyers can be incorporated into drugstores and pharmacy chains.

He asked if the state that was prosecuting somebody for diversion had access to those records. If it is banned in one state, that will make it hard for people in other states to get it.

Mary is the Martin Luther King Professor of Law at UC Davis. She wrote “Dollars for Life: The Antiabortion movement and the Fall of the Republican Establishment” as well as the forthcoming “Roe: The History of a National Obsession.” The views expressed in this commentary are not of hers. CNN has an archive of opinion articles.

Just the same, supporters of abortion rights have made the most of the best strategies available to them, bolstered by the fact that most Americans support at least some access to legal abortion.

The Comstock Act was passed in 1873 to disrupt access in blue states, mainly because it was anti-vice. He saw the country’s morals as being preoccupied with sex and was made an agent of the US Postal Service.

When Comstock died, Americans began to doubt his crusade and the courts began to limit the application of the law. Judges suggested that there were lawful uses of some drugs, like contraceptives, and that the Comstock Act applied only to those who intended to violate the law. It meant that patients acting under a doctor’s advise would be exempt from the act.

Some members of the antiabortion movement are pushing for a comeback of the Comstock Act, arguing that local laws have an obligation to follow federal law.

The Department of Justice would not take enforcement of the act very seriously if the supreme court made it illegal to mail abortion pills. The stakes of the 2020 election are already high for blue states. A Republican president could take a very different position on enforcing of the Comstock Act, with dire consequences.

It is a wakeup call for those in blue states if the focus is on the Comstock Act. Now is the time to begin working toward the repeal of the law.

The Texas Abortion Laws: The Case against the FDA During a 20-Year Attorney General Seiberg-Witten Trial

The FDA approved the first drug for abortion in 20 years thanks to a lawsuit filed against the agency by anti-abortion advocates.

Reproductive rights advocates say that if Kacsmaryk sides with the plaintiffs, “it would eliminate the most commonly used method of abortion care,” according to NARAL Pro-Choice America.

The FDA wrote that if long-standing FDA drug approvals were easy to overturn, it would make it hard for pharmaceutical companies to rely on FDA approval decisions to develop the pharmaceutical-drug infrastructure that Americans depend on.

“A preliminary injunction would interfere with Congress’s decision to entrust FDA with responsibility to ensure the safety and efficacy of drugs. In discharging this role, FDA applies its technical expertise to make complex scientific determinations about drugs’ safety and efficacy, and these determinations are entitled to substantial deference.”

Danco, which makes mifepristone, also made a similar request to the FDA’s in a court filing, stressing that the lawsuit could decimate the company’s business.

Since then, he’s helped make Texas a legal graveyard for policies of President Joe Biden’s administration, presiding over 95% of the civil cases brought in Amarillo, Texas.

Kacsmaryk put on hold the most recent effort to end the so-called “Remain in Mexico” program. He has watched Texas cases challenge vaccine mandates, gender identity guidance issued by the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and restrictions on the use of Covid-19 relief funds for tax cuts.

Kacsmaryk worked at the First Liberty Institute, a nonprofit that focuses on religious liberty issues, before joining the court.

The case is being closely watched by a number of interested parties, including Republican and Democratic state attorneys general. On Friday, two different multi- state coalitions filed commentaries with the court urging them to act in either direction in the matter.

The attorneys general of a dozen Democratic-controlled states are trying to get the Food and Drug Administration to let them use the first of the two drugs that can be used in abortion.

The case is threatening to affect every part of the country since the lawsuit is against a federal agency.

And activists are mobilizing in Texas around the issue, with the Women’s March planning to hold a rally at the federal courthouse in Amarillo, Texas, on Saturday.

The Danco Medications Action after the Supreme Court Rules: The California Attorney General’s Case against the Governor’s Decision to Order Roe v. Wade

On Thursday, Kacsmaryk told thePlaintiffs that they had until February 24 to respond to the Danco filing, and that following the deadline briefing will then be closed absent any extraordinary circumstances.

In an interview with NPR, Washington state Attorney General Bob Ferguson, who co-led the suit, noted that the REMS has been applied only to a few dozen high-risk prescription drugs — such as fentanyl and other opioids.

“So you’ll have two federal judges potentially looking at the future of mifepristone, whether to expand access to it or eliminate access altogether,” Ferguson says.

“We find it highly ironic that the same attorneys general who filed an amicus brief in our case two weeks ago arguing that the FDA’s judgments must not be second-guessed have now filed a lawsuit in a different court arguing just the exact opposite,” Baptist says.

The other pharmacy chains to which Republican attorneys general sent their letters — including CVS, Costco, Walmart, Rite Aid, Albertsons and Kroger — did not immediately respond to NPR’s request for comment about whether they are considering following suit.

A spokesman for Newsom did not immediately answer a question about the practical effects of the governor’s announcement. Rob Bonta, the Democratic state attorney general in California, blasted Walgreens for being pressured by GOP officials.

The clash between Newsom and Walgreens, a massive chain with thousands of stores around the country, marks the latest round of fallout following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. The ruling, handed down in June of last year, shook up national politics ahead of the 2022 midterms – with many Democrats crediting the backlash for helping their candidates in tough, swing state and seat races – and complicated relationships between political and business leaders.

“Medication abortion is safe, effective, and serves as a lifeline for people in need of critical care, especially those from vulnerable and underserved communities,” Bonta said on Friday. “I am disappointed that Walgreens has decided to give in to political pressure from anti-abortion states, and cut off access to these necessary and lifesaving medications.”

Kansas state law protects abortion. The state voted to block attempts to ban the procedure just two months after the Supreme Court ruled against it.

California Employee Insurance Program: How the State Suppresses Walgreens for Its Employees’ Indemnity Coverage in the Healthcare Sector

California, which will soon become the world’s fourth largest economy, has great buying power in the healthcare market.

Even if the state only cut Walgreens out of state employee insurance plans, the company might see a big financial impact: The state insures more than 200,000 full-time employees. Another 1.5 million, including dependents up to the age of 26, are covered by CalPERS, its retirement insurance program.