259 congressional Democrats push court to decide in favor of abortion pills

A group of 259 congressional Democrats is urging a federal appeals court to decide in favor of abortion groups sending mail-order abortion pills throughout the U.S., sidestepping states’ pro-life laws. 

The Democrats are attempting to sink Louisiana’s effort to restore an in-person dispensing requirement for mifepristone. The July 22 friend-of-the-court brief asks the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to deny the state’s request to pause the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) 2023 rule change that lifted regulations on the deadly drug. Louisiana’s request is only for that pause to be put in place while the state’s legal challenge proceeds. 

The rule change was enacted under the Biden administration as part of what former President Joe Biden called an “all-of-government” effort to promote and defend abortion in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down Roe v. Wade. It allows certified pharmacies to dispense mifepristone and permits the drug to be shipped to patients rather than being provided in person at a medical facility.

All 47 Democratic senators and 212 Democratic House members joined the filing, according to a press release from Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee. The brief’s lead signers include Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.; Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash.; House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y.; and Reps. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., and Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass.

The lawmakers argued that the FDA’s decision to eliminate the in-person requirement rested on scientific evidence and that reinstating it would improperly restrict the most common method of early abortion. They called Louisiana’s proposed nationwide restriction “onerous” and said it would make mifepristone more difficult to obtain, especially for women who live far from abortionists.

They also contended that the FDA began dismantling the in-person rule before the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, disputing Louisiana’s claim that the agency sought to undermine the Dobbs decision. A court first suspended the requirement in 2020, the FDA announced its removal in 2021, and the agency finalized revised safety rules in 2023.

Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill and Rosalie Markezich brought the lawsuit against the FDA. Markezich alleged that her former boyfriend pressured her into taking abortion pills he obtained by mail in 2023, killing her unborn child and causing lasting physical and emotional harm. The plaintiffs argued that removing in-person medical oversight exposes women to coercion and complications while also undermining Louisiana’s pro-life laws.

In their latest reply brief, filed July 29, the plaintiffs also challenged the evidence the FDA cited for the removal of the safeguard. Louisiana cited data in the agency record showing more than twice as many emergency-room visits following telemedicine and mail dispensing compared with emergency-room visits after an in-person visit. The drugmakers defending the rules have disputed whether emergency-room visits necessarily indicate serious medical harm.

The case has already reached the Supreme Court once on an emergency basis. The Fifth Circuit temporarily restored the in-person safeguard May 1, but the Supreme Court blocked that order May 14 while the appeal proceeds, allowing mail distribution to continue.

Trump administration opposes Louisiana’s pro-life effort

In a July 15 brief, the Department of Justice asked the appeals court to uphold a district judge’s decision pausing Louisiana’s litigation while the FDA conducts a safety review, or alternatively to hold the appeal itself in abeyance. The Trump administration also argued that Louisiana and Markezich lack legal standing.

That posture has intensified pro-life pressure on the administration. As Zeale News recently reported, CatholicVote President and CEO Kelsey Reinhardt has repeatedly called on President Donald Trump to reverse the telehealth expansion and remove the drugs from the mail.

Ahead of the State of the Union in February, Reinhardt called chemical abortion “the front line of the abortion industry” and urged the President to rescind the Biden administration’s policy. When the Justice Department sought to pause or dismiss a separate challenge brought by Missouri, Idaho, and Kansas, she warned that any serious defense of unborn life must confront chemical abortion directly.

“At minimum, it requires enforcing the safeguards that once governed these drugs,” Reinhardt told Zeale in March, while also calling for an end to casual mail distribution and support for states’ authority to protect life.

Chemical abortions now account for nearly two-thirds of clinician-provided abortions in the U.S.