U.S. Senator Katie Britt, R-Alabama, recently joined 90 Republican lawmakers in filing an amicus brief in the Western District of Louisiana demanding the prohibition of online, mail-order abortion pills and the reinstatement of an in-person dispensing requirement for mifepristone, one of two drugs commonly used in medication-induced abortions.
In the brief, Britt and the other lawmakers argue that the Food and Drug Administration did not have “sufficient evidentiary basis to conclude that eliminating the in-person dispensing requirement was safe” when it authorized the online prescription of mail-order mifepristone under the Biden administration in 2023.
The lawmakers go on to suggest that the telehealth prescription of mail-order mifepristone prevents women from being “meaningfully screened for serious contraindications for the use of [the] drug, such as ectopic pregnancy” and that the lack of an in-person dispensing requirement “also increases the likelihood that some women are being coerced into taking these drugs against their will.”
“The rise of mail-order chemical abortion drugs endangers not only the lives of unborn babies, but also the health and safety of their mothers. Not to mention the horrifying stories we have heard from women who have been subject to coercion and deception by abusers,” Britt said in an official statement. “My colleagues and I will continue to fight every day to protect women and children from this dangerous drug by ensuring the rule of law is upheld.”
In a press release announcing Britt’s involvement in the amicus brief, the senator’s office repeatedly refers to mifepristone as one of several “dangerous chemical abortion drugs.” However, according to the American Medical Association, mifepristone’s safety and efficacy is “overwhelming” and “on par with common painkillers like ibuprofen and acetaminophen” which more than 30 million Americans take daily.
APR reached out to Britt to ask why she and her team repeatedly referred to the medication as “dangerous” despite its proven track record as a safe and effective drug tested in over 630 published clinical trials.
“The chemical abortion drug mifepristone is dangerous because it kills babies and endangers the life of the mother, especially when taken without proper medical supervision—which we know is happening under the mail-order distribution system,” Britt claimed in an email response. “We also know that the widespread availability of this abortion drug can lead to coercion and abuse of women. Abortion is the only medical procedure wherein success is measured by the ending of a heartbeat.”
“Look no further than the case of Jona Affholder, whose ex-boyfriend—a doctor, no less—drugged her with crushed abortion drugs and held her against her will, preventing her from seeking medical assistance,” the senator added. “Her story illustrates how these drugs can be weaponized against women and their unborn children, and the importance of reinstating in-person dispensing requirements.”
In addition to their arguments related to patient safety, Britt and the other lawmakers also contend that the FDA’s authorization of mail-order abortion medications stands in violation of congressional authority and the 1873 Comstock Act, which makes it illegal to mail “[e]very article or thing designed, adapted, or intended for producing abortion” and “[e]very article, instrument, substance, drug, medicine, or thing which is advertised or described in a manner calculated to lead another to use or apply it for producing abortion.”
At the time, the Biden administration argued that the order did not violate the Comstock Act, as the law does not prohibit the mailing of abortion medications where the sender “lacks the intent that the recipient of the drugs will use them unlawfully.”
The lawmakers’ brief comes on behalf of Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill’s ongoing lawsuit against the FDA, which seeks to end the online prescription and mailing of mifepristone, arguing that the policy allows residents to circumvent the state’s abortion ban. The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals originally sided with Louisiana in May, until the U.S. Supreme Court stayed the order and sent the case back to the lower courts for further consideration. The case is ultimately expected to reappear before the nation’s highest court on appeal, with serious implications for the future of abortion access in the U.S.
In addition to Britt, U.S. Senator Tommy Tuberville, R-Alabama, also signed onto the brief, as well as Republican Alabama U.S. Representatives Gary Palmer, Mike Rogers and Robert Aderholt.
