Attacks on Abortion
(Photo illustration by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)
A Texas federal judge has invalidated the FDA ruling on mifepristone. Mifepristone is a common medical abortion drug used widely throughout the United States. This controversial decision has sparked a national, and now international conversation about the importance of protecting abortion.
The US judge, Matthew Kacsmaryk, ruled in favor of the plaintiffs who argued that mifepristone was incorrectly advertised as a drug marketed to address serious illnesses and providing therapeutic effects to those with hormonal impairments. The judge further explained that when the FDA originally approved the drug as a safe and effective method to conduct medical abortions it was due to political pressure. Furthermore, Judge Kacsmaryk claimed that the approval caused more deaths and severe reactions than restrictions on the drug would. This ruling marks the first time in American history that a Federal District Court attempts to overrule a federal approval of a drug or medicine. It causes the drug to be removed unilaterally off the market, which could have come as quickly as the week following the decision, if the government and other rights associations don’t step in to protect the civil and human right of abortion.
This decision comes nearly a year after the controversial landmark decision in the Supreme Court case Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization. The case took to the Supreme Court in the summer of 2022, as the first case on abortion within the newly conservative Court. Dobbs overturned the previous case precedent created by Roe v Wade, in which a woman’s right to choose whether to terminate a pregnancy was considered a constitutional right. In the Dobbs decision, the Supreme Court heard a case surrounding a Mississippi ban on abortion after the 15 week gestation period, with only a few exceptions for severe fetal abnormality or a medical emergency. The lower courts in this case struck down the law, as it violated the precedent set by Roe in 1973. The Supreme Court upheld this law, which was a direct overruling of Roe, which provided protections for abortion up until the point of viability. By ruling in favor of the Mississippi law and overturning Roe, the Supreme Court allowed states the power to implement bans on abortions, which would limit and potentially eliminate access to medically approved abortions across the nation.
There are various reasons why individuals believe that mifepristone should be banned or restricted in the United States. These reasons usually include religious or moral beliefs about the use of medical abortion pills. Some believe that abortion is morally wrong and should not be legal or as easily accessible, as mifepristone offers. Others believe that abortion is a very politically controversial issue and make restricting abortion access part of their political campaign. But, more recently, these campaigns have turned towards claiming that mifepristone is unsafe. This is despite research that proves that mifepristone is a completely safe drug that has been approved by the FDA for over 20 years. Those who believe mifepristone should be banned often cite the claim that it offers potential for misuse or abuse of the abortion medication. However, it has become increasingly clear that there is an overwhelming need for protection and guaranteed access to mifepristone.
Mifepristone is a medication that is primarily known for its use in medication abortion, in which it can be used in addition to misoprostol, another abortion drug, to terminate early pregnancy in a safe and effective manner, which has been approved by the Federal Drug Administration for over 20 years. Most commonly, mifepristone is prescribed to women who are experiencing a miscarriage and ectopic pregnancies in order to help them pass the fetus without having to carry it to term, which can have lethal consequences. However, mifepristone is also used for a number of other purposes within the medical field. One of the other main prescriptions of mifepristone is for treatment for Cushing’s Syndrome, a condition that is caused by excess cortisol. Mifepristone is able to block the damaging effects of excess cortisol and reduce the harmful symptoms, like high blood pressure, diabetes, and weakness. In addition, mifepristone has been used to treat uterine fibroids, a noncancerous growth that can occur within the uterus and cause heavy bleeding and intense pain. Mifepristone can block the effects of progesterone, a reproductive hormone, to reduce the size of these fibroids and reduce symptoms and pain. With further technology, mifepristone has even begun to be investigated as a potential drug to help treat other conditions that largely impact women, such as breast cancer, endometriosis, and meningiomas. Ultimately, this emphasizes the important usage of mifepristone and how devastating banning the drug would be to many people.
Due to the large scope of uses for mifepristone, there has become both a national and international interest in protecting the use and access of this drug. This has sparked conversations about the federal role in protecting a woman’s right to abortion, along with the international human right to an abortion.
The Federal Government, under the Biden Administration, has appealed the decision through the Texas case. The Department of Justice nearly immediately filed an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court following this decision, in a last attempt to provide federal protection to the widely common abortion drug. They asked for the decision made by the Texas Court to be stalled until the litigation could play itself out. The manufacturers of the drugs are also inputting their defense for mifepristone and asking for this decision to be overturned, claiming that the ruling created chaos across the country. This appeal from the Justice Department went to the Supreme Court, which will make a final decision on the future of abortion rights, once again.
The Supreme Court has provided their decision regarding access to mifepristone and their opinion on the Texas ruling, ultimately deciding to keep the drug on the market. This protection of the drug only lasts as long as the litigation regarding the Texas case continues throughout the appeals process. This comes from a predicted 7 to 2 decision from the Supreme Court ruling on the drug, with dissents from both Justice Alito and Justice Thomas. For now, this ruling of the Supreme Court means that the decision from the Texas Court does not become implemented and the use of mifepristone can continue. However, this is not a protection that is enshrined or cemented in any right for women to choose whether or not to have an abortion. The federal government and other international organizations would need to step up in order to provide legitimate protections for the right to an abortion.
However, the federal government could take the protection of the right to an abortion a step further through the protection of the use of mifepristone. The government can employ the principle of federal preemption in order to protect the use of medical abortion. This process would preempt state laws that restrict or ban the use of medication abortion, due to the federal approval of the drug through the FDA. This would mean that federal law and approval of the drug would take precedence over state law, and states would not be able to regulate medication abortion in ways that conflict with federal law. In addition, federal preemption could protect the use of medication abortion by preventing states from enacting laws that interfere with the doctor-patient relationship or that impose undue burdens on women seeking medication abortion. By preempting these state laws, federal law could ensure that women have access to safe and effective medication abortion without unnecessary barriers.
In addition, there are international protections that can be used to protect the right to abortion.
Abortion is considered a human right by the United Nations, because it is a fundamental aspect of reproductive healthcare. They also consider the ability to make decisions about one's own body as a basic human right. This protection of the human right to reproductive autonomy is a statute under international human rights law. The United Nations has affirmed that the right to decide the number, timing, and spacing of children is a basic human right. They have also expressed that individuals have the right to access safe and legal abortion services. In fact, the UN has recognized that restrictions on access to safe and legal abortion services can constitute a violation of human rights, including the rights to life, health, privacy, and equality. Furthermore, denying individuals access to a safe and legal abortion service can have serious consequences, including maternal mortality and morbidity, increased rates of unsafe abortions, and infringement of individuals' rights to health and bodily autonomy. This is considered to be a violation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which states that "every human being has the inherent right to life" and that "the right may not be invoked in the case of executions pursuant to a sentence of a court following his conviction of a crime for which this penalty is provided by law.” This treaty and its protections can be enforced via the UN Security Council and international law dispute settlements, which would require the right to abortion to be protected.
The right to access safe and legal abortions is a clear fundamental human right that is critical for the health and safety of women. The approval and protection of the use of mifepristone as a medical abortion offers expanding access to the procedure and medical assistance for serious illnesses, particularly for those who do not have safe and easy access to other methods of medical help and abortion clinics. However, despite this limited protection for mifepristone, there are still worldwide barriers to abortion access that must be addressed in order to fully protect this necessary human right. It is essential for the health and well-being of women and those experiencing serious medical conditions to ensure that everyone has the freedom to choose and the opportunity to make any decision they desire about their body and lives, proving the fundamental need for abortion protections.