“They often say, ‘The patients can’t tell me what they took,’ so we don’t know even that it was FDA-approved mifepristone.” “The declarants offer nonspecific statements that are untethered to actual facts about what drug a patient took,” Ellsworth said. Jessica Ellsworth, the lawyer representing Danco Laboratories, which manufactures the name brand version of mifepristone known as Mifeprex, questioned the claims of the anti-abortion physicians who brought the suit and were referenced in court records. Physicians aren’t required to perform procedures to which they hold a religious or moral objection, under the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, Harrington said. Physicians who brought the lawsuit failed to demonstrate “imminent risk” of being forced to perform a medical procedure that goes against their conscience as a result of complications from mifepristone, Harrington said. District Court for the Northern District of Texas Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk’s ruling to overturn mifepristone’s approval an “unjustified attack on FDA scientific expertise.” Deputy Assistant Attorney General Sarah Harrington called U.S. In the meantime, access to mifepristone, one of two drugs used in medication abortions, remains legal under a temporary order from the U.S. The three-judge panel’s ruling, which could come anytime after oral arguments, will likely be put on hold as the case moves up to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, arguing its approval of mifepristone in 2000 was improper and subsequent changes to its use didn’t rely on solid science. Observers see the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals as a legal way station for the case, in which anti-abortion groups sued the U.S. NEW ORLEANS - A federal appeals court panel quizzed lawyers during oral arguments Wednesday over a Texas judge’s decision that could end access to the abortion pill nationwide.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |