Knowing that the case of the abortion pill was likely to arouse public indignation, Kacsmaryk has taken extraordinary measures to maintain procedures under Wraps: generally, details on the affairs of the Federal Court are published on a file accessible to the public. But at a conference call with lawyers on March 10, Kacsmaryk said he would try to delay the hearing announcement until the day before. However, the Washington Post learned the call a day later, giving the public warning of the future hearing.
During the March 15 hearing, according to the Washington PostKacsmaryk appeared open to the claims of the anti-abortion group according to which mifepristone could be harmful or even fatal, and that the FDA approval process had been precipitated.
“How many women should die?” The lawyer for the anti-abortion group, Erik Baptist, asked during the hearing, according to the Lubbock avalanche-Journal.
In reality, scientific evidence categorically demonstrates that Miffepristone is sure. In 2018, FDA data shows, 24 out of 3.7 million died after taking mifepristone, although their death cannot be a conclusive linked to drugs. Lawyers from the Ministry of Justice, who defended the FDA, said that 99.9% of Mifepristone users have no major side effects.
Ordering a prohibition of a drug approved by the FDA – in particular an so widely used for more than 20 years – would be an unprecedented decision. Recognizing this, Kacsmaryk asked Baptist if he was aware of the other decisions that had removed a drug, according to the Associated Press. There was none, said Baptist, but he argued that this was due to the previous challenges of the FDA on drugs.
In a “normal world”, Lorie ChaitenThe principal lawyer for the draft freedom of reproduction of the American Civil Liberties Union, told Buzzfeed News before the hearing of March 15, the trial of the anti-abortion group would have been rejected from the start. The fact that it was not shows that we have entered “unexplored waters”, she said.
“What the complainants asked here are unprecedented,” said Chaiten. “The courts simply do not jump and do not remove market medicines, especially not those who have been on the market since [23 years]. “”
Before the arguments in the Texas affair, the States led by Democrats continued the FDA At the end of February at the American District District Court of Washington. The complaint mainly asked the court to order the agency to delete an additional layer of restrictions on mifepristone. But he also looked for a decision prohibiting the agency “to take any measure to withdraw mifepristone from the market or reduce its availability”. Friday, the district judge Thomas Owen Rice, appointed to Barack Obamadid this exactly, noting that a preliminary injunction was in the public interest.
However, Rice wrote that a national injunction in this case was “inappropriate”, citing the competitive dispute in Texas.
Although it is not clear how the Supreme Court will settle the differences in both opinions, the impact of Kacsmaryk's decision is felt nationally – if it is authorized to take effect.
“Even in states where abortion is legal, if it is an unprecedented drug, there could be legal repercussions to continue to prescribe it and certainly so that these sponsors continue to distribute it,” said Chaiten.
David Mack and Stephanie K. Baer contributed to report to this story.
