politics
Drugmaker Asks Supreme Court to Review Mifepristone Mail-Order Limits
A pharmaceutical company producing the abortion pill mifepristone has appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court to block a federal appeals court ruling that prohibits mail-order distribution of the drug nationwide. The Fifth Circuit's decision restores in-person requirements for obtaining the pill, reversing pandemic-era FDA changes.
manilatimes.netAudio version
Tap play to generate a narrated version.
A federal appeals court has blocked the mailing of the abortion pill mifepristone nationwide, restoring in-person dispensing requirements that were eased during the COVID-19 pandemic. The ruling by a three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals took effect Friday, prohibiting telehealth prescriptions and mail distribution of the drug.
A pharmaceutical company that manufactures mifepristone, Danco Laboratories, filed an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court on Saturday, seeking to stay the decision. The appeals court order halts Food and Drug Administration rules that expanded access to mifepristone, which is used in a majority of U.S. abortions according to data from the Guttmacher Institute.
The court cited concerns over the FDA's handling of safety data, noting that the agency had eliminated requirements to report adverse events before expanding access. Judges stated that the policy undermined state abortion laws, particularly in places like Louisiana where abortion is largely illegal.
The Fifth Circuit's decision requires women to obtain mifepristone prescriptions in person from a medical professional, reinstating protocols from before 2021. The court acknowledged the ruling's nationwide effect, writing that it would restrict distribution systems in use for years.
This follows a lower court order that had temporarily allowed mail access while legal challenges proceeded. Judges criticized the FDA for removing adverse event reporting and then using the lack of data to justify broader access. The ruling sided with pro-life states, stating that federal policy facilitated abortions in defiance of local bans.
For instance, the court noted that every abortion enabled by the policy cancels Louisiana's protections for unborn life from conception.
“It is true, as the district court noted, that a § 705 stay 'would, as a practical matter, have a nationwide effect.'”
