Opposites Attract in Federal Court: 10 Things to Know About the Conflicting Chemical Abortion Rulings 

Caroline Wharton - 12 Apr 2023

A lot of major news often gets dropped on holidays or late Friday afternoons, and following that trend, Good Friday this year saw not one but two federal rulings on Chemical Abortion Pills. These holy day rulings have subsequently caused a lot of confusion as they’re in direct conflict with one another, and if you’re not exactly sure what to make of them either, we’ve got you. Here’s a brief background on the rulings and our analysis:  

What Went Down on Good Friday: 

As Students for Life of America (SFLA) President Kristan Hawkins put it, U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk made it “a Good Friday indeed” when he ordered a hold on the federal approval of mifepristone, the first of two drugs in the Chemical Abortion Pill regimen. She praised his decision as “a milestone for pro-life Americans fighting to protect mothers, the preborn, and the environment from deadly pills shoved onto the U.S. market.” 

The very same day, however, another contradictory decision on mifepristone was made by U.S. District Judge Thomas O. Rice. The Associated Press reported that he “essentially ordered the opposite and directed U.S. authorities not to make any changes that would restrict access to the drug in at least 17 states where Democrats sued in an effort to protect availability.”  

Our 10 Takeaways:  
  1. We welcome the split circuit. When two courts come to different conclusions on a matter/the law, it’s called a “split circuit” — and it could very well be a ticket to the Supreme Court as that’s the logical place to end up. In the meantime, there will be appeals and other processes.  
  1. This is a fight to which we’re looking forward. The no-test, online distribution of Chemical Abortion Pills exposes women to injury, infertility, death, and abusers (whether that be domestic or through sexual slavery). The dangerous drugs also create a potential environmental crisis — so bring it on. For too long, abortion has festered in the dark (we have no National Abortion Reporting Law), but now here comes the sun — this fight in court can expose the true nature of Chemical Abortion Pills.   
  1. Protecting women from abusers should concern us all. No matter your stance on abortion, no one should support endangering women, and Chemical Abortion Pills truly are the abusers’ dream drug. SFLA reported earlier that abusers use these drugs to kill inconvenience, and these inconveniences can include “a pregnancy as a result of sexual abuse — such as the Nebraska mother who forced her 12-year-old child to take Chemical Abortion Pills to cover up her stepfather’s pedophilic actions. Other times, the inconvenience can be a parent’s embarrassment or frustration at their child becoming pregnant, as we saw with Sanchez [who tried to force feed her 16-year-old daughter the pills against her will]. It can also be married men attempting to hush up a pregnant mistress, as one U.K. official was recently charged.” Human traffickers can also use these pills to continue their cycle of profiting off abuse.  
  1. Supporting abortion isn’t an argument for harming women, the preborn, and the environment. While we don’t support any method of abortion because the evil practice kills preborn children, both sides of the aisle should be able to agree that we don’t want to see women and the environment hurt.  
  1. Before the Dobbs decision, even Roe couldn’t protect deadly abortion methods. Remember that even was Roe was at the zenith of its power, the cancerous ruling couldn’t uphold Partial Birth Abortions. That “tool” of abortion could be prevented — in much the same way, Chemical Abortion Pills could be prevented.   
  1. Unfortunately, even more deadly Chemical Abortions are likely to take place. The abortion lobby clearly doesn’t prioritize women’s health as abortionists nationwide are pledging to continue to kill with just one pill (misoprostol) — and studies have shown that the one pill regimen is even more deadly. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not approve the use of misoprostol (without mifepristone) for abortion as such usage is drastically unsafe for women — yet this is exactly what abortion supporters are now propping up.  
  1. SFLA and Students for Life Action will be front and center in this fight. We have a number of plans in place to confront this new reality so stay tuned to our social media and podcasts to learn more about our new strategy.  
  1. Remember that the polls are on our side. SFLA’s Demetree Institute for Pro-Life Advancement released a reputable YouGov poll that showed that more than 9 out of 10 Millennials and Gen Z registered voters do not want society harmed by these life-ending pills. Who then actually does want to see Chemical Abortion Pills pushed? The abortion industry, of course — these pills cut their overhead and help make them a quicker buck.   
  1. “Forum shopping” isn’t a devious pro-life method; that’s what everyone does. Some are decrying the Texas decision over the idea that the region was picked in order to influence the decision outcome; welcome to How Lawyers Work 101. Choosing the right court to file in is what lawyers do. The fact that the Democratic Attorneys General went to Washington state while the Alliance Defending Freedom went to Texas is standard operating procedure. 
  1. Ballot box predictions from abortion lovers aren’t reliable. Many reporters and “analysts” are arguing that the Republican Party (the pro-life party in the United States) will lose big for fighting for women as well as preborn children. Instead, they make the case that the Democratic Party (which supports infanticide, coercion, and abuse of power in support of abortion post-birth) will have election advantages — but that’s just not historically accurate, and it’s not even what happened in the last cycle.  Even more importantly: ignoring abortion is not on the table.  

READ NEXT: University Slaps $8,000 Price Tag on SFLA President Kristan Hawkins Event 

Share this post