A federal judge in Texas overturned a two‑decade‑old approval of a safe and effective abortion pill on Friday, marking the latest volley in a conservative battle against reproductive rights in the United States. If it stands, the ruling by a Donald Trump appointee would reverse the Food and Drug Administration’s permission for a drug widely used to terminate unwanted pregnancies.
Moments later, a judge in Washington state issued a contrasting decision in a separate case, ordering that access to the drug be preserved in more than a dozen states. The dueling opinions, combined with an immediate vow by the U.S. Department of Justice to appeal the Texas ruling, make it almost certain that the issue will reach the Supreme Court. The conservative‑dominated panel that last year overturned the landmark *Roe v. Wade* decision had already removed the constitutional protection of a woman’s right to abortion that had lasted half a century.
Reactions to the Texas ruling were swift. President Joe Biden declared, “My administration will fight this ruling. The court… has substituted its judgment for the FDA, the expert agency that approves drugs. If this ruling were to stand, then there will be virtually no prescription approved by the FDA that would be safe from these kinds of political, ideological attacks.” Jack Resneck, president of the American Medical Association, called the interference “reckless and dangerous,” saying it undermines the extensive, evidence‑based scientific review that underpins FDA processes. Planned Parenthood’s president, Alexis McGill Johnson, described Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk’s decision as “an assault on science,” adding that “we should all be enraged that one judge can unilaterally reject medical evidence and overrule the FDA’s approval of a medication that has been safely and effectively used for more than two decades.” Attorney General Merrick Garland announced that the Justice Department would appeal, stating, “The Justice Department strongly disagrees with the decision… and will be appealing the court’s decision and seeking a stay pending appeal.”
Kacsmaryk’s ruling followed a lawsuit by a coalition of anti‑abortion groups seeking to freeze the national distribution of mifepristone. While he stayed the FDA’s 23‑year‑old approval, he also paused “applicability of this opinion and order for seven days” to allow time for appeals. Anti‑abortion advocates celebrated the decision. Katie Glenn of Susan B. Anthony Pro‑Life America said, “Today’s decision out of Texas is a win for the health and safety of women and girls. The ruling reaffirms that pregnancy is not an illness and abortion is not health care. Finally the FDA is being held accountable for its egregious violation of its own rules.”
Critics labeled the case as an example of “judge‑shopping,” where plaintiffs file suit in a district whose judge has a history of rulings favorable to their position. Federal judges in the United States can issue rulings with national legal force. Opinion polls show a majority of Americans favor access to abortion, yet the issue remains explosive for many on the right, especially evangelical Christians. Several Republican‑dominated states have begun restricting abortion access and launching legal challenges to what many believed was settled law. The Supreme Court’s overturning of *Roe* last year was seen as a major victory for the movement, but it has proved unpopular with the electorate; some observers attribute the Republican failure to capture the Senate in last year’s midterms, and their modest showing in the House, at least partly to their stance on the issue.
More than half of all abortions in the United States are performed with medication. Mifepristone, one component of a two‑drug regimen used through the first ten weeks of pregnancy, has a long safety record. The FDA estimates that 5.6 million Americans have used it to terminate pregnancies since its approval.
Comments are closed for this story.