ACLU Takes Federal Government to Court Over Abortion Pill Restrictions

It’s arguing that a decade-old FDA rule places an “undue burden” on women.

Protestors rally outside of the Supreme Court on March 2, 2016 during oral arguments in the Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt case.Douliery Olivier/Sipa via AP Images

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

On Tuesday, the American Civil Liberties Union sued the Food and Drug Administration over the agency’s restrictions on medication abortion. The lawsuit, filed in a U.S. District Court on behalf of a Hawaii doctor and several health care associations, specifically targets a restriction on mifepristone, a common drug used in medication abortion. 

Medication abortion involves two drugs, mifepristone and misoprostol. The FDA’s current rules, implemented in 2007, only allow mifepristone to be dispensed at a medical facility, like a doctor’s office or a clinic. By contrast, misoprostol is available at pharmacies with a prescription. Dr. Graham Chelius, a family medicine doctor in Hawaii and a plaintiff in the suit, says that the mifepristone restriction has made it nearly impossible for patients in rural Hawaii to access the procedure at all. That’s because, he says, some hospitals in the state, including his own, don’t stock mifepristone. 

“Because of the FDA’s restrictions,” said Chelius in a press release, “my patients are forced either to fly to a different provider on another island—resulting in serious delays—or to carry a pregnancy to term against their will.” According to the lawsuit, carrying a pregnancy to term poses a risk of fatality that is fourteen times greater than taking Mileprex, the brand name for mifepristone.

“The FDA restrictions harm patients by delaying time sensitive healthcare, imposing needless costs, and blocking some women from accessing abortion at all,” Julia Kaye, a staff attorney with the ACLU’s Reproductive Freedom Project, told reporters. 

More than a third of people who choose to end their pregnancies use medication abortion to do so, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

Chelius and the ACLU are hoping to overturn the FDA rule, which would then allow patients to pick up prescriptions for mifepristone at their local pharmacy and expand access to the procedure for low-income and rural women. 

“This case is about where a woman is standing when the pill is handed to her,” says Kaye. “This is about abortion stigma, not science.” 

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate