Danville City Council Advances "Sanctuary City for the Unborn" Ordinance

On April 25, the Public Services Committee of the Danville, Illinois city council voted 3-1 to advance a "sanctuary city for the unborn" ordinance. A final vote in the full 14-member City Council is expected on May 2.

The proposed ordinance would require compliance with the 1873 Comstock Act. The Comstock Act is federal legislation that prohibits the transportation of "obscene" materials through the mail. The law specifically prohibits abortion-inducing drugs and abortion-related paraphernalia from being transported this way. While Griswold v Connecticut famously struck down a portion of this legislation by legalizing contraception for married couples, the law was never entirely struck down. Now, after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, pro-life groups hope to use the Comstock Act to protect the unborn.

Some pundits argue that the Comstock Act could have a broader effect on the nationwide legality of abortion than many realize. “Every single abortion in the United States, surgical or medical, requires something that comes in the mail,” said University of California-Davis School of Law professor Mary Ziegler wrote for Slate. “Abortion providers don’t create their own medical devices or surgical instruments. They don’t make their own drugs. They get them from medical device manufacturers and pharmaceutical distributors.” If manufacturers and distributors then transport these items in the mail, they could be subject to the Comstock Act.

Residents are determined to pass the sanctuary city ordinance after an Indiana abortion business purchased a property in Danville. The city's location near the state border makes it ideal for Indiana abortionists trying to circumvent pro-life state laws.

The Sanctuary Cities for the Unborn Initiative, a national organization working to help cities throughout the US enact such ordinances, met with residents several times last month to help educate the community on how the Comstock Act can be used in local ordinances.

Danville aldermen Ethan Burt, Eve Ludwig, and Robert Williams voted to advance the ordinance, while alderwoman Tricia Teague voted in opposition. Alderman Rick Stebing abstained, and the two remaining members of the Public Services Committee (aldermen Sherry Pickering and Darren York), were absent.

The day before the April 25 vote, the ACLU of Illinois sent a letter via email to the committee asking them to reject the ordinance. The ACLU made two arguments. The first is that the ordinance would violate Illinois's 2019 Reproductive Health Act. The second is that the Comstock Act is not applicable in Illinois.

The Comstock Act, as federal law, should override state law. If courts interpret the Comstock Act to broadly prohibit the transportation of abortion paraphernalia and find the law to be constitutional, then the ACLU's first argument falls moot. The US Supreme Court may issue a decision on this as Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (a pro-life challenge to the FDA's approval of the abortion drug mifepristone) advances through the courts.

The ACLU's second argument leans on a memo issued by Biden's Department of Justice last December. As an opinion written by an executive bureaucrat (not a judge), that memo does not create a judicial precedent. In that memo, Assistant Attorney General Christopher Schroeder argued that the Comstock Act does not do what it says. He argues that it only prohibits the transportation of abortion paraphernalia when the sender intends that the recipient will use it in violation of a separate law. This interpretation by the Biden administration is shaky, and it could easily be rejected by courts.

During the April 25 meeting, Danville Mayor Rickey Williams shared that Attorney Jonathan F. Mitchell has promised to represent Danville "at no cost to the city or its taxpayers" if the city faces a lawsuit stemming from the ordinance. Mitchell has argued five times before the US Supreme Court, and he is credited with being one of the minds behind Texas's groundbreaking Heartbeat Act.

Click here to read more.

North Dakota Gov. Signs Law to Clear Up Language in "Trigger" and Heartbeat Laws

North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum (R)

On April 24, North Dakota Gov Doug Burgum signed a bill designed to protect unborn children from abortion after the state supreme court struck down earlier pro-life laws.

North Dakota Supreme Court Chief Justice Jon Jensen wrote in the majority decision last month, “While the regulation of abortion is within the authority of the legislature under the North Dakota Constitution, RRWC has demonstrated likely success on the merits that there is a fundamental right to an abortion in the limited instances of life-saving and health-preserving circumstances, and the statute is not narrowly tailored to satisfy strict scrutiny.”

The new legislation intends to clean up language in the state's "trigger" bill and heartbeat bill so that they will survive judicial scrutiny. Under the new standards, abortion would be prohibited at all gestational ages with exceptions for women facing "death or serious health risk." There is also an exception to allow abortion in cases of rape or incest during the first six weeks of gestation.

This bill clarifies and refines existing state law which was triggered into effect by the (U.S. Supreme Court) Dobbs decision and reaffirms North Dakota as a pro-life state,” Gov. Burgum said in a statement.

Click here to read more.

Des Plaines Abortion Clinic Nearly Kills Patient by Fentanyl Overdose

American Women's Medical Center in Des Plaines, IL

On February 20, A 34-year-old patient nearly died after an abortion clinic in Des Plaines, Illinois overdosed the patient on Fentanyl and Versed.

The incident occurred at the American Women's Medical Center in Des Plaines. Chilling audio from a 911 call obtained by Operation Rescue captures the moment when the patient stopped breathing.

You can listen to a recording of the 911 call here.

The abortionist, Dr. Cheryl Chastine, spoke with the 911 operator on speaker phone to explain the situation. "Ok, I have a patient that I gave fentanyl and Versed [a generic name for the drug midazolam] to who is... we are trying to reverse those things right now. Respiratory status has been pretty questionable. She is actually coming around trying to breathe on her own."

Chastine went on to say that her oxygen levels were at 83%, a level that would eventually cause brain damage if not raised. She asked that the 911 operator stay on the line in case the situation worsened.

Shortly afterward, Chastine told the 911 operator that the patient stopped breathing, and she began administering rescue breaths.

Background chatter in the recording suggests that the clinic administered Narcan at this time. Narcan is a drug used to counteract the effects of Fentanyl after an overdose. Emergency personnel often carry Narcan to save drug addicts who overdose when taking Fentanyl recreationally. In this case, the overdose was caused by Chastine and the abortion clinic.

Click here to read more.

Mississippi Gov Signs Group of Pro-Life Laws

Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves (R)

Last week, Pro-Life Mississippi Gov Tate Reeves signed several pro-life laws designed to help support women and families seeking alternatives to abortion.

“Mississippi will always protect life. Our state will continue to be a beacon on the hill, a symbol of hope for the country, and a model for the nation,” said Governor Tate Reeves. “Mississippi will be relentless in its commitment to life. We will be relentless in our support of mothers and children. And we will be relentless in our efforts to advance the New Pro-life Agenda. The legislation I signed today is further proof that when it comes to protecting life, Mississippi isn’t just talking the talk – we’re walking the walk.”

The new laws help mothers and families in several ways:

House Bill 510 establishes a foster parents bill of rights. It is meant to provide transparency to foster parents about their rights and responsibilities.

House Bill 1670 expands the tax credit for pregnancy resource centers from $3.5 million to $10 million.

Senate Bill 2696 creates an income tax credit for qualified adoption expenses. The program offers $10,000 in tax credits for families who adopt children from Mississippi and $5,000 for families who adopt children from out of state.

House Bill 1318 increases the age that mothers can drop off their children in safe haven baby boxes.

Click here to read more.

Court Suspends Enforcement of Colorado Abortion Pill Reversal Ban

On April 22, a federal judge temporarily blocked enforcement of a Colorado law that would prohibit pro-life doctors from using abortion pill reversal (APR).

Pro-abortion Colorado Gov. Jared Polis signed the bill into law on April 14. If enforced, it would threaten healthcare providers with disciplinary action if they provide APR to patients. APR would be considered "unprofessional conduct" according to state medical agencies until they meet to determine whether APR meets a "generally accepted standard of medical practice."

Judge Daniel Domenico placed a temporary stay on the enforcement of Colorado's APR ban after a lawsuit from the Catholic healthcare clinic Bella Health. The clinic argued that the law violates its First Amendment rights and religious freedoms.

Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser later revealed to the court that state medical and nursing boards have chosen not to enforce the ban until at least September when those boards complete a rule-making process regarding the regulation of APR.

APR can reverse the effects of the abortion pill mifepristone, potentially saving the preborn child's life if taken within 48 hours after mifepristone. Mifepristone kills an unborn child by disrupting the pregnancy hormone progesterone. This hormone helps facilitate the flow of oxygen and nutrients to the preborn child. By disrupting this flow, mifepristone kills the child through starvation and asphyxiation.

APR counteracts mifepristone by simply administering more progesterone. Progesterone is already prescribed by doctors to help women facing medically difficult pregnancies. This supplementary progesterone can restore the flow of oxygen and nutrients to preborn children and save lives.

Click here to read more about APR from the abortion pill rescue network.

Click here to read more about the Colorado APR ban.

Supreme Court Returns Abortion Pill Challenge to 5th Circuit

On the evening of April 21, the US Supreme Court issued a decision allowing the Biden FDA to continue its lax regulation of the abortion drug mifepristone while a legal challenge progresses through federal courts.

The Supreme Court's 7-2 decision sent Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration back to the 5th Circuit for a full hearing. That hearing is scheduled for May 17.

Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented, arguing that the Biden DOJ and the abortion pill manufacturer Danco “are not entitled to a stay because they have not shown that they are likely to suffer irreparable harm in the interim.”

The lawsuit stems from a 2002 petition from doctors and pro-life groups challenging mifepristone's approval. That petition, which was stonewalled by the FDA for over 20 years, argued that the FDA unlawfully fast-tracked mifepristone's approval through a process intended for the treatment of life-threatening diseases. Further, the groups argue that the FDA's research does not support the drug's approval.

National Right to Life released a paper addressing seven myths about mifepristone's approval process and safety record. That paper can be viewed here.

The 5th Circuit ruling stayed by the US Supreme Court would have reverted mifepristone's regulatory status back to the standards used from 2000 to 2016. Those standards required in-person doctor visits, limited the abortion pill's use to the first seven weeks of pregnancy, prohibited the mail delivery of abortion pills, and required the abortion industry to report non-fatal adverse events.

Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Erik Baptist, who is representing the pro-life groups' challenge to the FDA, said the Supreme Court's decision was not unexpected.

“As is common practice, the Supreme Court has decided to maintain the status quo that existed prior to our lawsuit while our challenge to the FDA’s illegal approval of chemical abortion drugs and its removal of critical safeguards for those drugs moves forward,” Baptist said. “Our case seeking to put women’s health above politics continues on an expedited basis in the lower courts. The FDA must answer for the damage it has caused to the health of countless women and girls and the rule of law by failing to study how dangerous the chemical abortion drug regimen is and unlawfully removing every meaningful safeguard, even allowing for mail-order abortions. We look forward to a final outcome in this case that will hold the FDA accountable.”

Click here to read more.

Anti-PRC Bill Advancing in Illinois House of Representatives

We are asking pro-life advocates to file witness slips against a dangerous piece of legislation that could shut down pro-life pregnancy resource centers (PRCs) throughout the state. The Illinois House of Representatives Health Care Availability & Accessibility Committee announced that it plans to consider SB1909 at a hearing on April 25, 2023. If the bill passes this committee, it will move on to the full Illinois House.

Click here to file a witness slip against SB1909.

After filling out the form with your information, make sure to click the boxes titled "opponent" to signal opposition to SB1909.

You can write "self" in the "Firm/Business or Agency" field and "Mr.", "Ms.", or "Mrs." in the "Title field.

Finally, click "record of appearance only" to file the witness slip.

After passing SB1909 in the Illinois Senate, pro-abortion legislators are advancing the bill in the Illinois House of Representatives. This legislation, titled the "Deceptive Practices of Limited Services Pregnancy Centers Act," threatens pro-life pregnancy resource centers with legal action for trying to dissuade mothers from choosing abortion.

It appears that the House of Representatives is abandoning HB2463, the original sister bill to SB1909. Instead, the House will simply push the Senate's bill. The Senate passed amendments to SB1909 that softened it somewhat, but pro-life advocates fear the bill might require PRCs to refer women for abortions.

The "Deceptive Practices of Limited Services Pregnancy Centers Act" threatens legal action against PRCs that allegedly use "deception, fraud, false pretense, false promise, or misrepresentation, or the concealment, suppression, or omission of any material fact" to persuade women against abortion or offer pregnancy-related services.

Pro-life groups take particular issue with the vague "omission of any material fact" language. "Material fact" is not defined by the bill. If a judge decides that information regarding where a pregnant mother can have an abortion constitutes a "material fact," then a PRC could be convicted for refusing to refer a mother to an abortion business.

Biden Admin to Launch National Abortion Referral Hotline

HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra
photo credit: Gage Skidmore / Flickr

Last week, the Biden administration's Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) released a "Notice of Funding Opportunity," seeking Title X grantees to launch an abortion referral hotline as part of the Title X program. The HHS expects to provide $1.5 million in grant funding to the recipient who establishes the hotline.

The "Title X Nondirective Options Information, Counseling, and Referrals Hotline" would offer counseling and referrals for abortion, prenatal care and delivery, infant care, adoption, and foster care.

A Title X grant recipient operating the hotline would be expected to "establish and operate a national hotline, develop and maintain a detailed national list of nondirective options referral service sites, and build and maintain a national website to compliment the hotline."

HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra issued a press release to coincide with the announcement.

“When the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, nearly half a century of precedent changed overnight,” said Secretary Xavier Becerra. “The Biden-Harris Administration is committed to protecting women’s lawful access to reproductive health care, including abortion care. President Biden signed not one but two executive orders calling on HHS to take action to meet this moment and we have wasted no time in doing so. Today’s action is yet another important step HHS is taking to protect patients accessing critical care.”

Click here to read more.

Supreme Court Extends Temporary Approval of Abortion Pill

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito

On April 19, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito issued a ruling to extend the temporary pause against the Fifth Circuit's abortion pill decision.

Last week, the Fifth Circuit issued a ruling in Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. Food and Drug Administration. The decision upheld part of a district court's decision suspending the approval of the abortion pill mifepristone. The Fifth Circuit ruled that the FDA could maintain its approval of mifepristone, but it must revert changes made in 2016, 2021, and 2023 that loosened the pill's regulation.

Alito's extension allows the Biden administration to continue its lax regulation of the abortion pill while the Supreme Court considers the case. The extension expires at 11:59 pm on Friday, April 21.

Click here to read more.

Kansas and Arizona Governors Veto Born-Alive Protection Bills

On April 14, Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly (D) vetoed a bill that would have offered protection to babies who survive attempted abortions. This follows a similar veto by Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs (D) one week earlier.

The Kansas bill would have required any child born alive after an attempted abortion to be afforded “the same degree of professional skill, care, and diligence to preserve the life and health of the child as a reasonably diligent and conscientious health care provider would render to any other child born alive.”

Additionally, it would have required abortion businesses to transport surviving children to a hospital for emergency care. Abortionists who violate the law would be guilty of a felony.

Pro-lifers are hopeful that the large pro-life majority in Kansas will override Gov. Kelly's veto.

Danielle Underwood, the Kansans for Life Director of Communications, released the following statement: 

“Legislators from both sides of the aisle stood together to state the simple fact that babies born alive after an attempted abortion should not be left to die on a cold, steel, table. These babies deserve protection and the same medical care as any other newborn of the same gestational age. This once again proves how out of touch Gov. Kelly is with the values of the people of Kansas. We now call on all Kansans to urge their legislators to do the right thing and override Gov. Kelly’s heartless veto.”

Gov. Hobbs's veto in Arizona is much more likely to be the final say on the state's born-alive protection bill. The state legislature only contains a slim pro-life majority.

Click here to read more.

Florida Gov. Signs Heartbeat Protection Act

On April 13, Florida Gov. Ron Desantis signed the Heartbeat Protection Act into law. This law would prohibit abortion in Florida after six weeks with some exceptions. The law received strong support from Florida lawmakers; passing by votes of  26-13 in the Senate and 70-40 in the House.

The new law can't be enforced until the Florida Supreme Court issues its final decision on Florida's current 15-week limit. After Dobbs v. Jackson, the court allowed Florida to enforce the 15-week limit pending a final decision. Pro-lifers are hopeful this is a sign that the court will uphold the 15-week limit. If that law is upheld, the new six-week limit would come into effect 30 days later.

Florida's new law contains exceptions for medical emergencies, rape, incest, or when the child is diagnosed with a fatal condition.

Abortionists or anyone who actively participates in illegal abortions under the new law could be charged with a third-degree felony. This is punishable by up to five years in prison. The charge increases to a second-degree felony if the mother dies during the illegal abortion. This is punishable by up to 15 years in prison.

The new law also provides $25 million for pregnancy resources and material support to help families with pregnancy and raising young children. These funds can be used for diapers, formula, cribs, clothing, parenting classes, and other parenting-related expenses.

“We are proud to support life and family in the state of Florida,” Gov. DeSantis said in a press release. “I applaud the Legislature for passing the Heartbeat Protection Act that expands pro-life protections and provides additional resources for young mothers and families.”

The press release continues, “While other states like California and New York have legalized infanticide up until birth, Governor DeSantis has enacted historic measures to defend the dignity of human life and transform Florida into a pro-family state.”

“This is a wonderful day for babies and their mothers in Florida,” said Lynda Bell, president of Florida Right to Life. “Pro-abortion groups lose the debate when they say we don’t care about women because this bill provides over $25 million in support for women and girls in an unexpected pregnancy. We Floridians value unborn children and their mothers.”

Click here to read more.

Supreme Court Temporarily Reinstates FDA Abortion Pill Approval

On April 14, one day after the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld part of a decision suspending the FDA's approval of the abortion pill mifepristone, the US Supreme Court issued an order temporarily reinstating the pill while they consider the case.

The ongoing court battle in Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. Food and Drug Administration concerns a group of pro-life groups and physicians who argue that the FDA unlawfully fast-tracked the approval of mifepristone through a process intended for the treatment of life-threatening illnesses. Further, the group argues that the FDA loosened mifepristone regulations improperly by ending a requirement for the abortion industry to report non-fatal adverse events. Afterward, the FDA used the resulting lack of data to claim that mifepristone is safe.

The Fifth Circuit ruled 2-1 that the FDA could maintain its approval of mifepristone, but its decision reverted changes made in 2016, 2021, and 2023 to loosen its regulation. The Fifth Circuit's decision would have left in place the original requirements that the pill only be used up to the seventh week of pregnancy, that pill methods of abortion take place over three doctors visits, that the drug only be dispensed in-person by doctors, and that abortion providers must report non-fatal adverse events.

Justice Samuel Alito granted the Biden administration's request for an emergency stay against the Fifth Circuit's ruling until April 19. He requested an additional briefing by April 18.

Erin Hawley, senior counsel at Alliance Defending Freedom (which is representing the pro-life groups), told CNA that the temporary ruling was expected. Hawley said,

“The entry of a brief administrative stay is standard operating procedure whenever the Supreme Court is asked to consider an emergency request like this one. It gives the court sufficient time to consider the parties’ arguments before ruling. We look forward to explaining why the FDA has not met its heavy burden to pause the parts of the district court’s decision that restore the critical safeguards for women and girls that were unlawfully removed by the FDA.”

While the Supreme Court's order persists, the Biden FDA can continue its lax regulatory standards regarding mifepristone. These allow mifepristone to be prescribed up to the tenth week of pregnancy, prescribed without a doctor's visit, and distributed via mail order.

Ohio Pro-Lifers Sue to Split Proposed Amendment into Separate Proposals

Members of Cincinnati Right to Life filed a lawsuit with the Ohio Supreme Court arguing that a pro-abortion amendment being proposed for the November ballot violates the state Constitution's procedures.

The lawsuit filed by Margaret DeBlase and John Giroux argues that the proposed amendment covers multiple issues, but constitutional amendments are limited to single proposals.

As written, the Right to Reproductive Freedom with Protections for Health and Safety amendment would create rights to contraception, fertility treatment, continuing one's own pregnancy, miscarriage care, and abortion.

Curt Hartman, the attorney representing the pro-lifers, told the Daily Signal that the amendment offers, “a laundry list of five different things: contraception, fertility treatment, miscarriage care, abortion, and continuing one’s own pregnancy.” He also told the Daily Signal that, “any proposed constitutional amendment can only propose what [the law] characterize[s] as one proposal.”

Hartman further told the Daily Signal that his clients are, “not trying to keep [the] amendment off the ballot,” but instead asking the Ohio Supreme Court to separate it into multiple amendments.

Supporters of the amendment are currently trying to collect 413,000 signatures before July 5 to place it on Ohio's November ballot.

Click here to read more.

Federal Court Strikes Down California Buffer Zone Law

On March 29, a federal court struck down part of a California law prohibiting pro-life advocates from counseling or protesting on public sidewalks near abortion clinics.

California passed SB 742 under the guise of protecting "vaccination sites." The law impacts speech outside abortion clinics that dispense STD vaccines.

The law outlawed "harassing" patrons of these "vaccination sites." Harassment is defined by the law as approaching within 30 feet of a person or occupied vehicle "for the purpose of passing a leaflet or handbill to, displaying a sign to, or engaging in oral protest, education, or counseling with, that other person in a public way or on a sidewalk area."

These activities are common methods pro-life advocates use to encourage abortion-minded women to choose life for their children. The language was clearly crafted to specifically prevent pro-life speech.

Life Legal filed a federal lawsuit challenging SB 742 on behalf of pro-life sidewalk counselors. In its decision, the court ruled that the prohibition on "harassing" as defined by the law "violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments," noting that "[T]he loss of First Amendment freedoms, for even minimal periods of time, unquestionably constitutes irreparable injury."

"We are pleased that the court emphasized the unconstitutionality of the legislature's shameless abuse of the term 'harassing' to encompass protected speech and activities," said Life Legal's Katie Short, who litigated the case before the court. "At a time when all manner of liberties is in jeopardy, pro-lifers – even in California – can be assured that federal courts have not wholly abandoned fundamental First Amendment principles."

Click here to read more.

Chicago Abortionist Calls Off Ambulance for Hemorrhaging Patient

On Feb 9, 2023, the Carafem abortion business in Chicago, Illinois called 911 to request an ambulance for a hemorrhaging 32-year-old patient. Carafem sent the ambulance away without the patient, but an employee had to call 911 a second time when the patient began hemorrhaging again.

Operation Rescue, an organization that highlights how abortion businesses physically harm women in addition to unborn children, obtained a recording of the 911 calls.

During the second call, a Carafem employee told the dispatcher, "The client is hemorrhaging. The ambulance came and she stopped at the point that they arrived. The doctor didn't think it was necessary for her to go to the hospital, and the moment she got up she started hemorrhaging again."

Hemorrhaging can occur during both surgical and drug-induced abortions. Excessive bleeding during hemorrhage can lead to death. By turning away medical professionals, Carafem put this woman's life at risk.

“This abortion business, like all the others, has shown evidence that it is profit driven and not motivated by patient care,” said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman. “The fact that the abortionist sent the medical care professionals away when this poor woman was suffering from a hemorrhage, possibly a life-threatening emergency, just confirms what we already knew. These abortionists do not care about women, they care about their bottom dollar and their reputation.

Click here to read more.

Biden Denies Tennessee Title X Funds for Not Requiring Abortion Referrals

The Biden administration has decided to withhold millions in family planning grants to Tennessee. Biden's Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is trying to pressure Tennessee to change its abortion policy, which currently does not require doctors to refer patients for abortions that are illegal in the state.

In correspondence between the Biden administration and Tennessee officials, the HHS Office of Population Affairs (OPA) wrote that doctors are expected to refer patients for abortions even if those abortions are illegal in the state the doctor works. "We understand that in some circumstances, those referrals will need to be made out of state," the OPA wrote.

The Chattanooga Times Free Press writes that Tennessee received $7.1 million in fiscal year 2022. Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee proposed budget changes to replace the Title X funds Biden is withholding. This includes $7.5 million in recurring funds and $1.875 million in non-recurring funds for fiscal year 2023.

“The federal government is denying Tennessee funding that has supported critical maternal and family care for thousands of Tennesseans for decades,” Jade Byers, a spokeswoman for Gov. Bill Lee (D), told Live Action News. “As we discuss next steps with the Attorney General’s office, Governor Lee will fulfill his commitment to serving families by proposing to amend the state budget to include state dollars to fill the void caused by the federal government’s decision.”

Click here to read more.

Texas and Washington Judges Issue Conflicting Rulings on FDA Mifepristone Approval

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and the US Supreme Court have issued preliminary rulings since this post was written. More information will be on our website on Monday, April 17 (and next week's newsletter).

----original post below----

On April 7, Trump-appointed US District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk issued a national injunction that would suspend the FDA approval of mifepristone (the first drug used in the abortion pill regimen). Hours later, Obama-appointed US District Judge Thomas Rice issued a conflicting injunction barring the FDA from "altering" the availability of mifepristone in 17 pro-abortion states.

Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) filed the lawsuit decided by Kacsmaryk. On behalf of pro-life medical organizations and a group of doctors who say they have prescribed mifepristone to women, ADF argued that the FDA unlawfully fast-tracked the approval of mifepristone through a process intended for the treatment of life-threatening illnesses.

In his decision, Kacsmaryk wrote,

”The court does not second-guess F.D.A.’s decision-making lightly. But here, F.D.A. acquiesced on its legitimate safety concerns — in violation of its statutory duty — based on plainly unsound reasoning and studies that did not support its conclusions. There is also evidence indicating F.D.A. faced significant political pressure to forgo its proposed safety precautions to better advance the political objective of increased ‘access’ to chemical abortion.”

Kacsmaryk also pointed out that the FDA stonewalled the plaintiff's petition for over 20 years.

"The legality of the 2000 Approval is now before this Court. Why did it take two decades for judicial review in federal court? After all, Plaintiffs’ petitions challenging the 2000 Approval date back to the year 2002, right? Simply put, FDA stonewalled judicial review — until now. Before Plaintiffs filed this case, FDA ignored their petitions for over sixteen years, even though the law requires an agency response within “180 days of receipt of the petition.”But FDA waited 4,971 days to adjudicate Plaintiffs’ first petition and 994 days to adjudicate the second. Had FDA responded to Plaintiffs’ petitions within the 360 total days allotted, this case would have been in federal court decades earlier. Instead, FDA postponed and procrastinated for nearly 6,000 days."

Kacsmaryk placed a one-week stay on his injunction, thus providing the Biden administration time to appeal his decision after the Easter weekend.

National Right to Life President Carol Tobias responded to the ruling, “This decision shines a light on something that the Biden Administration wants to sweep under the rug – that these drugs do not treat or cure disease but kill unborn children and expose their mothers to dangerous side effects. The FDA should be in the business of ensuring safety, not in taking lives.”

Mere hours later, Judge Rice issued a separate injunction prohibiting the FDA from "altering" the availability of mifepristone in 17 pro-abortion states and the District of Columbia. Attorneys general from these states are actively suing the FDA to argue that mifepristone is currently too heavily regulated.

The states affected by Rice's injunction include Washington, Oregon, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Nevada, New Mexico, Rhode Island, Vermont, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.

US Attorney General Merrick Garland expressed his intent to appeal Kacsmaryk's decision.

Click here to read more.

Michigan Governor Signs Repeal of 1931 Abortion Ban

On April 5, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer signed legislation repealing the state's 1931 law which made it a felony to assist in an abortion.

The abortion law was unenforceable after the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, but it should have gone into effect once again after the US Supreme Court overturned Roe. Whitmer and other pro-abortion activists filed lawsuits to block the law from being enforced.

“Today, we are coming together to repeal the extreme 1931 law banning abortion without exceptions for rape or incest and criminalizing nurses and doctors for doing their jobs,” Whitmer said in a press release.

“Standing up for people’s fundamental freedoms is the right thing to do and it’s also just good economics. By getting this done, we will help attract talent and business investment too. I will continue to use every tool in my toolbox to support, protect, and affirm reproductive freedom for every Michigander, and I’ll work with anyone to make Michigan a welcoming beacon of opportunity where anyone can envision a future.”

The idea that society should sacrifice innocent human life for the sake of "economics" or "business investment" is appalling. Human lives are inherently valuable in a way that can't be defined by money.

“Today is a dark day for women in our state and for unborn children nearing birth,” said Right to Life Michigan President Barbara Listing. “Cloaking the elimination of long-standing, common-sense health and safety protections in the mantra of ‘women’s rights’ demonstrates the extreme nature of the Governor’s abortion activism.”

Click here to read more.

Federal Judge Upholds Indiana Dismemberment Abortion Ban

On March 31, a federal judge ruled that Indiana's 2019 ban on dismemberment abortions can remain in place.

This law prohibited the dilation and evacuation method of abortion. This method involves an abortionist reaching through a mother's cervix with metal instruments to tear the child apart piece by piece. Dismembering the child this way causes the child to bleed to death.

The law's enforcement was blocked before it could take effect in 2019, but Judge Sarah Evans Barker lifted the injunction after the US Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in the summer of 2022. Court proceedings continued, but the law became enforceable during this time.

Barker's ruling last month rejects the challenge by abortionist Caitlin Bernard. Her argument was based on the "undue burden" standard often used when Roe v. Wade was a standing precedent. Barker granted Bernard 30 days to file an amended complaint under a new legal theory.

Bloomberg Law wrote that this new legal theory claims that "the dilation and evacuation abortion ban violates a person’s 14th Amendment substantive due process right to bodily integrity, at least as it applies to nonelective abortions."

Click here to read more.

Washington Gov Stockpiles Mifepristone as Lawsuit Challenges Pill's FDA Approval

Washington State Gov. Jay Inslee (D)

Pro-abortion Washington State Gov. Jay Inslee used his power to stockpile 30,000 doses of the abortion pill mifepristone in preparation for a possible court decision ordering the FDA to withdraw its approval of the drug.

Inslee directed the Department of Corrections to order the doses using its pharmacy license. The pills arrived in Washington on March 31, costing the state $1.28 million. The University of Washington purchased an additional 10,000 pills.

Inslee ordered the mifepristone to prepare for a potential decision from Texas federal judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, who is overseeing a challenge to the mifepristone's FDA approval.

“This Texas lawsuit is a clear and present danger to patients and providers all across the country,” Inslee said. “Washington will not sit by idly and risk the devastating consequences of inaction. We are not afraid to take action to protect our rights. Washington is a pro-choice state and no Texas judge will order us otherwise.”

Inslee says that the pills will continue to be available in Washington regardless of Kacsmaryk's decision.

The Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine (AHM) filed the lawsuit challenging mifepristone's FDA approval in November of 2022. It represents groups of pro-life doctors from the American College of Pediatricians, the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the Christian Medical & Dental Associations. AHM's lawsuit accuses the FDA of “illegally approving chemical abortion drugs that harm women and girls.”

Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) is representing AHM in this case. ADF senior counsel Erik Baptist argued that President Bill Clinton's executive order fast-tracking the FDA approval of mifepristone exploited the approval system. “To add to this problem,” Baptist said, “the FDA did not have any evidence or studies on the potential harms of the drug regimen before approving it.”

Click here to read more.