Skip to main content
Politics

Texas judge rules lawsuit by 3 states against abortion pill can continue

Listen
Share

A Texas judge has given new momentum to a legal battle over mifepristone, the widely used abortion pill, by allowing a lawsuit challenging it to move forward. Attorneys general from Idaho, Missouri and Kansas filed a lawsuit aimed at limiting how mifepristone is prescribed and distributed.

States Challenge Mifepristone’s Use and Distribution

The states argue the pill, which can be mailed to patients, violates their local abortion laws.

Missouri’s law bans abortions after a fetus is considered “viable,” meaning it could survive outside the womb without medical assistance. However, there are no providers in Missouri currently offering this service. Kansas allows abortions up to 22 weeks of pregnancy, while Idaho has a complete ban on abortion at any stage.

The states also claim mifepristone can lead to physical and mental complications, resulting in healthcare costs they argue the states will have to cover.

The plaintiffs are pushing for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, FDA, to step in, requesting the agency mandate in-person visits for patients and limit the pill’s use to the first seven weeks of pregnancy, rather than the current 10-week window.

Mifepristone has become a central tool for medical professionals in the wake of the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, which ended the federal right to abortion. The drug, used in combination with a second medication, is now involved in approximately half of all abortions in the United States.

The current lawsuit follows a series of legal challenges against mifepristone. In November 2022, a group of doctors sought to have the drug banned, claiming the FDA ignored safety risks when it approved mifepristone. Texas Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk initially sided with the challengers, halting the drug’s approval. However, an appeals court reversed his ruling, reinstating the pill with some restrictions.

In 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld broad access to the drug, ruling the challengers lacked standing to bring the case. Despite this, attorney generals from Idaho, Missouri, and Kansas have now taken up the issue, with similar claims but without the doctors.

The defendants in the case argue the lawsuit should be dismissed because the plaintiffs filed in the wrong jurisdiction, as there is no clear connection between the states involved and the state of Texas.

The American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU, warned the court’s decision could lead to more litigation aimed at restricting access to abortion medications, further challenging women’s reproductive rights across the country.

Tags: , , , , , ,

[Karah Rucker]

THE LEGAL BATTLE OVER WOMEN’S REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS COULD BE INTENSIFYING AS A TEXAS JUDGE REVISITS THE FATE OF THE ABORTION PILL, ALLOWING A LAWSUIT AGAINST IT TO MOVE FORWARD. 

ATTORNEYS GENERAL FROM THREE STATES—IDAHO, MISSOURI, AND KANSAS—ARE CHALLENGING MIFEPRISTONE IN COURT, TAKING AIM AT HOW IT’S PRESCRIBED AND DISTRIBUTED. 

A TEXAS JUDGE MADE THE RULING LAST WEEK…PUSHING FORWARD THE STATES COMPLAINT AGAINST THE DRUG MANUFACTURER AND FDA. 

THEY SAY THE PILL, WHICH CAN BE SENT THROUGH THE MAIL, GOES AGAINST STATE ABORTION LAWS.

MISSOURI’S LAW BANS ABORTIONS AFTER A FETUS IS CONSIDERED “VIABLE”—MEANING IT COULD SURVIVE OUTSIDE THE WOMB WITHOUT MEDICAL ASSISTANCE. HOWEVER, NO PROVIDERS IN THE STATE CURRENTLY OFFER THIS SERVICE.

KANSAS ALLOWS ABORTIONS UP TO 22 WEEKS OF PREGNANCY, WHILE IDAHO HAS A FULL BAN ON ABORTIONS AT ANY STAGE OF PREGNANCY.

THE STATES ALSO ARGUE THE DRUG CAN CAUSE PHYSICAL AND MENTAL COMPLICATIONS CREATING HEALTHCARE COSTS THAT THE STATES END UP PAYING.

THEY’RE ASKING THE FDA TO STEP IN TO REQUIRE IN PERSON VISITS AND LIMIT USE TO THE FIRST SEVEN WEEKS OF PREGNANCY–INSTEAD OF 10 WEEKS.  

SINCE THE SUPREME COURT OVERTURNED ROE V. WADE, ENDING THE FEDERAL RIGHT TO ABORTION, MIFEPRISTONE HAS BECOME A CRUCIAL TOOL FOR MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS—USED IN HALF OF ALL ABORTIONS SINCE 2022.

BUT GREATER ACCESS HAS ALSO SPARKED MORE LEGAL CHALLENGES. IN NOVEMBER 2022, A GROUP OF DOCTORS WANTED TO BAN MIFEPRISTONE, CLAIMING THE FDA IGNORED SAFETY RISKS. TEXAS RULED TO HALT THE DRUG’S APPROVAL, BUT AN APPEALS COURT REVERSED THAT DECISION, REINSTATING THE ABORTION PILL WITH LIMITS. 

IN 2024, THE SUPREME COURT RULED TO KEEP BROAD ACCESS, SAYING THE CHALLENGERS DIDN’T HAVE STANDING. 

THE ATTORNEYS GENERAL TOOK UP THE CASE FOLLOWING THE RULING, REMOVING THE DOCTORS FROM THE COMPLAINT AND CHANGING SOME OF THE LAWSUITS ARGUMENTS. 

THE DEFENDANTS ARGUE THE LAWSUIT SHOULD BE DISMISSED, CLAIMING THE PLAINTIFFS FILED IN THE WRONG JURISDICTION SINCE THERE IS NO CONNECTION TO TEXAS.

THE ACLU SAYS THIS CASE LEAVES THE DOOR OPEN FOR MORE LAWSUITS TO BE FILED , THREATENING ACCESS ACROSS THE COUNTRY. 

FOR STRAIGHT ARROW NEWS, I’M KARAH RUCKER.