The 5th Circuit’s new abortion pill ruling targets patients.
On Wednesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5thCircuit announced a decision in a closely watched case concerning the first drug in the FDA-approved medication abortion regimen: mifepristone. It’s important to note at the outset that regardless of the court’s reasoning, in the short term, nothing will change regarding the way abortion pills are accessed or regulated. Earlier this year, the Supreme Court issued a stay that will maintain the status quo until itmakes a final decision on this case. However, it is equally important to understand that this decision, if it were to take effect, will cause a radical departure from the standard of care and sow deep confusion.
Last year, after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, a group of antiabortion plaintiffs challenged the FDA’s 2000 approval of mifepristone and subsequent regulatory actions in 2016 and 2021 that loosened the agency’s exceptional and unnecessary distribution limitations for the drug. A Texas district court judge with a history of antiabortion views agreed with the plaintiffs and issued an injunction that would have suspended the approval of mifepristone nationwide. After two weeks of intense legal wrangling, the Supreme Court stayed the injunction throughout the entire course of litigation.
The Supreme Court also sent the case back to the 5thCircuit, a federal appeals court, to review the case more fully. Yesterday, that court released its decision. In it, the majority of a three-judge panel found that the plaintiffs’ challenge to the brand-name and generic approvals of mifepristone faced procedural issues that made their claims unlikely to succeed. As a result, the court would not suspend the drug approvals. This is a significant deviation from the lower court decision and an undeniable win for the FDA.
AdvertisementHowever, the panel found that the FDA’s subsequent ease of restrictions was likely to be arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedures Act, preliminarily enjoining those later FDA decisions. Though, again, this opinion will take effect only if the Supreme Court refuses to hear the case (or ultimately agrees with the 5thCircuit). Its effects would be enormous.
Advertisement Advertisement AdvertisementThe 5thCircuit’s order would take us back to the regulatory regime in 2016, before the FDA modified mifepristone’s label and distribution limitations. The old drug label approved mifepristone only through seven weeks of pregnancy, not the 10 weeks through which it is currently approved. The original label also instructed doctors to use a higher dose—triplethe currently approved dose—which comes with greater, negative side effects.
AdvertisementMoreover, before 2016, the FDA attached even more distribution limitations than it does today, which were especially onerous: Only physicians were permitted to prescribe the medication (excluding nurse practitioners, midwives, and physician assistants); more importantly, patients had to pick up and even take the medicine at a clinic, rather than having it mailed to take at home. Patients often had to visit a clinic multiple times, thwarting the primary benefit of a medication abortion.
In 2016 and 2021, after careful study and review of the safety and effectiveness evidence, the FDA extended the gestational limit for the drug, lowered the dose, and lifted these distribution restrictions (though it kept several others in place that state officials and groups are challenging in other litigation). These changes are supported by peer-reviewed evidence and medical practice around the world and have been responsible for an uptick in medication abortion usage in this country. But the 5thCircuit would have the country revert to an era of outdated information and medical practice that belies what is best for patient health and hampers access to a safe and effective drug.
AdvertisementRelated From Slate
Molly Olmstead
What the SCOTUS Scandals Tell Us About the Super Rich
Read MoreReturning to these increased restrictions on mifepristone would have widespread and harmful impacts everywhere, including in states that permit abortion. There would be fewer abortion providers thanks to the physician-only rule, and clinics would no longer be allowed to mail mifepristone. Returning to in-person care, especially if it involved multiple visits, would increase the cost of abortion and overwhelm the brick-and-mortar clinics right as they are strained from the influx of out-of-state patients. Virtual clinics that counsel patients online and mail pills could no longer provide abortion care with mifepristone. The recent rise of abortion by telehealth has become a necessary part of our abortion ecosystem in this crisis moment.
AdvertisementDespite these challenges, the 5thCircuit’s judgment, if ultimately enforced, will not stop medication abortion and would not necessarily mean returning to a previous era of medication abortion practice. First, physicians regularly prescribe drugs off-label, so they could—and almost certainly would—continue to prescribe mifepristone through 10 to 12 weeks of pregnancy and at the current lower dose. However, the drug company is not permitted to market or distribute the drug with an unapproved label. The process of changing a drug’s labeling is not simple and could take time, which could result in a short-term nationwide disruption in patients’ ability to access mifepristone while the manufacturer works to reimpose the old labeling. To combat this, the FDA could use its enforcement discretion to give the manufacturer a temporary reprieve while it makes these changes.
Advertisement Advertisement AdvertisementSecond, nothing in this litigation pertains to the second drug in a medication abortion, misoprostol, which across the world is taken on its own to end pregnancy. Indeed, the World Health Organization lists misoprostol as an essential medicine that is a safe and effective form of medication abortion. This drug is approved by the FDA for ulcer treatment and was notchallenged in this or any other case. That means that providers may switch to off-label prescription of misoprostol-only abortions and continue to provide this form of abortion with advanced practice clinicians, through 10 or 12 weeks of pregnancy, via telehealth and mailed pills. But the gold standard, for comfort and efficacy, is the two-drug regimen with mifepristone. The 5thCircuit’s decision would mean a less-than-optimal regime for patients.
AdvertisementPopular in News & Politics
- We’ve Been Entertaining an Illusion About the Supreme Court. It’s Finally Been Shattered.
- A Supreme Court Justice Gave Us Alarming New Evidence That He’s Living in MAGA World
- Them Supreme Court Boys Are at It Again
- In a Week Full of Hypocrites, Greg Abbott Came Close to Winning the Crown
Third, this case will have no impact on the online market for pills outside the formal health care system, both internationally and domestically. People will still be able to access both mifepristone and misoprostol through these informal networks. Indeed, if mifepristone becomes harder to access legally and through health care providers, we know from history as well as current practice that many will choose to access it in other ways. Obtaining pills outside the formal health care system is safe and, in most cases, cheaper, as has been proved by the various medical care providers and informal networks helping patients access these drugs in states that have criminalized abortion care since the Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade. But many patients prefer the comfort and expertise of a provider, and the 5thCircuit’s decision will make it harder to access.
These realities make clear that if this case were ultimately ever successful, even partially, it would serve only to harm patients, despite its pretextual purpose of promoting “patient safety.” It would return the drug to a label with greater side effects, hamstring providers into offering a slightly less effective regimen, and force many patients outside the formal health care system. This case has nothing to do with “protecting women,” but rather ending abortion at pregnant people’s expense.
Tweet Share Share Comment-
12 Sculptures Made From Recycled Materials天全两路乡 震后新增山葵种植面积1800亩新会泓达堂:用“冠军”的心,做冠军品质的陈皮金稻田农业专业合作:保护好新会陈皮的道地性Apple's iPhone 17 will come with a huge RAM upgrade, report claims定了!2023年云浮市中药实用型技能竞赛12月1日举行坚定特色发展定力 助推县域经济跨越发展市级安全生产文明施工标准化工地评审办法出台Cicadas love to land on people. Experts explain why.八月份我市将集中开展正风肃纪大检查
下一篇:The local version of Project 2025 is already causing devastation.
- ·Sports minister says audits into football, badminton federations set to conclude in Sept.
- ·素质拓展 让我们变得更强
- ·新会超记陈皮:专注核心产区陈皮,独守匠心工艺
- ·中华民族一家亲!中央民族歌舞团慰问演出走进连南
- ·Kamala Harris’ ridiculous problem with the political press.
- ·从“对口援建”到“对口合作”援建亮点不断展现
- ·我市个人征信有奖知识竞答火热进行中
- ·石棉县人民检察院开展警示教育 服务生态文明建设
- ·This shark lives for centuries. Scientists discover how it resists aging.
- ·国网四川检修公司喷涂杆号 旧塔披“新衣”
- ·素质拓展 让我们变得更强
- ·荥经县地税局举办个人所得税代扣代缴系统应用培训
- ·Best Labor Day headphones deals: Apple, Bose, Beats, and more on sale
- ·从“主动脉”到“毛细血管” 交通重建让雅安路网更顺畅
- ·4名嫌疑人持假币购物被依法刑事拘留
- ·甜上心头的连州菜心,在2023深圳食博会大受追捧
- ·Webb telescope discovers 6 rogue worlds. They didn't form the way you'd expect.
- ·抢时间 保质量 高效推进灾后恢复重建
- ·四川师范大学教授到汉源探寻七姓将军遗迹
- ·我市获省级节能专项奖励资金775万元
- ·Aricell CEO arrested in first case under industrial accidents law
- ·铜中百年华诞,校友拳拳爱心
- ·做好新闻宣传报道 营造良好重建氛围
- ·新会陈皮之夜!玩转新会陈皮的N种方式
- ·全国土壤普查办抽验组到广东开展土壤普查质量抽验
- ·做好新时期干部工作 为实施后发追赶“排兵布阵”
- ·Webb telescope discovers 6 rogue worlds. They didn't form the way you'd expect.
- ·荥经县地税局举办个人所得税代扣代缴系统应用培训
- ·名山区林业局协助完成川藏铁路拟使用林地可行性报告外业调查
- ·省运会我市摔跤队连夺四金
- ·Blinken condemns Russia
- ·掘金跨境电商!河源市组织百人电商培训活动
- ·“新车6年免检”9月1日起实施
- ·甜上心头的连州菜心,在2023深圳食博会大受追捧
- ·11 Telescopes Exploring The Magic of Space
- ·国家林业局工作组深入天全县调研森林保险工作