A conservative group by the name of Alliance for
Hippocratic Medicine filed a lawsuit against the
FDA in November of 2022, challenging access to
Mifepristone and Mifepristone- the medications
that account for over half of all abortions done in
the United States. Mifepristone itself was extensively studied and approved to go on the market
nearly twenty years ago back in the year 2000. Meanwhile, Mifepristol was first approved in
1988 for prevention of gastric ulcers. However, the AHM is now claiming in their lawsuit that
the FDA lacked authority to approve these drugs and that they lacked sufficient and extensive
testing required to approve a drug. The group is calling for all access to these drugs to be
completely blocked, and could since affect the entire nation’s access to the medications. The case
is still ongoing with its most recent hearing just two weeks ago. In most cases like this, a
fast-tracking trial would happen to expedite the process. Unfortunately, Judge Matthew
Kacsmaryk (appointed by former president Donald Trump) decided against fast-tracking, further
slowing down the process.”Having considered the briefing and relevant law, the court determines
that consolidation would not be appropriate in this case.” The lawsuit was filed in Texas, a
notorious anti-abortion and Republican state. “If FDA approval of mifepristone is revoked, 64.5
million women of reproductive age in the US would lose access to medication abortion care, an
exponential increase in harm overnight,” NARAL said in a statement.

Graphic (depicted in image) that measures medication abortion use in the U.S.

Despite the fact that the Alliance claims mifepristone is harmful, it has a success rate of 95%.
Misoprostol, on the other hand, has a success rate of 80-85%. Both medications have
complication rates of less than 1% (Ipas.org).The factual evidence and extensive research
conducted by the FDA is more than sufficient for conclusivity of the safety and effectiveness of
the drug. “We shouldn’t be going backwards in our advancements in medicine and technology.
We shouldn’t be banning things that are beneficial for our future,” expressed Asha Diaz (10). In
fact, it serves as no surprise or coincidence that the AHM filed this lawsuit in Texas, knowing
Judge Kacsmaryk’s views on abortion. Pro-choice groups don’t seem too optimistic on this
matter, knowing that they are in the minority in the state of Texas.

Protestor Lindsey London holding a sign advocating
for protection on abortion medication outside a
Federal Courthouse in Amarillo, Texas (depicted in
image).
Many students at Wheeler also expressed their
disappointment about the pending ban, feeling that
it is unfair and unsafe.

Senior Marjory Drullard (12) firmly expressed her feelings on this situation saying the following:
“I think it’s kinda crappy that they are completely disregarding statistics and science just because
of their own personal beliefs, when it comes to women’s safety they’re not thinking about the
woman, they’re thinking of their own beliefs and how it would affect them. In reality, it has
nothing to do with them. In conclusion, most of these decisions are being made by men and not
actual women. We are citizens and we should have a right to say what we can and can’t do with
our bodies.”

Junior Carly-Ford Stickney (11) expressed similar sentiments regarding the ban:
“To be honest, any woman who decides to get an abortion, that is her decision and hers only.
Some people are against abortions but some have to for serious reasons. They should make a
drug for women to get an abortion without worrying if they have to keep it. It’s good that they
still have a chance to get the abortion they want based off of studies too. I know today’s society

is crappy and pro-life but it’s still a personal thing for a woman to take care of. Not a man who
doesn’t understand what it’s like to be pregnant.”

“So basically, they’re trying to ban abortion drugs? Hasn’t Texas already banned abortion itself?
If not, this is just indirectly banning it…and saying that it is unsafe for young girls is a terrible
excuse because not only is it safe, but young girls are not an exception to things like rape, which
can lead to them needing an abortion! Young girls are literally likely to die if they have to bear a
child; it would be safer to keep the drugs legal.” expressed Kiara Speights (11).

Picture of protestors advocating for abortion
rights from CNN Newsource
Pristine Villarreal depicted in image.
Not only is the pending ban infringing
constitutional rights to personal bodily
autonomy, but it is a lawsuit that should be
handled by the FDA, not members of Congress
who aren’t very familiar with the medications.

“As someone who has taken the medication multiple times before, the easy access to it made it
very helpful and ultimately only benefitted me and my partner’s situation at that time. It helped
us have more time to strengthen our bond and get our lives situated in order to prepare ourselves
to start a family at a later time,” reported an anonymous source.

Ultimately, it’s clear that access to these medications is important to young women everywhere.
Banning abortion medications is not only unethical and unsafe, but doing so would be a clear
violation of personal freedoms and the right to bodily autonomy. Not only is there little to none
evidence that the medications are unsafe, but overall this lawsuit is evidently politically
motivated and not actually concerned with the health and safety of young women.