The idea of the FDA simply repealing approval of mifepristone is scary. Wouldn't there have to be some compliance with the Administrative Procedure Act to do that? Would a trump presidency have enough Congressional flunkies to repeal THAT Act? Of course, if trump is president there will be a lot more issues at stake than abortion. But I can see the dangers described here.
Mifepristone is used for other things than abortions. Would patients who need it for that reason be affected by the "repeal" by the FDA.
The Comstock Act seems to involve interstate mailing. Would it be construed to include things like Fed Ex or UPS? What about a simple truck or train shipment, say from the manufacturer to a pro choice state. Would it include, say, Instacart delivery in-state from your pharmacy to you in a pro-choice state?
As Jessica notes in other parts of the interview, the "unknowns" of all these actions are part of the chilling effect. I'm frankly not sure about FDA's process on withdrawal of approval but it's basically the inverse of the case we saw in the Supreme Court earlier this year. And given current circumstances, we have to expect each Republican administration will get better and better at using administrative burdens to effectively remove or reduct access to not just but also misoprostol, for instance. Then Democrats, possibly, get power and attempt to reverse these actions as the situation keeps getting more dire.
I wish we could put more focus and terminology on ‘Women’s Health Care.’ Too many people have a knee-jerk reaction to the word “abortion” as though all abortions are for people who want to kill babies - lazy careless people who don’t care. Not enough said that too often being pregnant is dangerous and life threatening to mother and child who are most in need of emergency health care. But instead are at the mercy of ignorant politicians.
My belief is that reclaiming the word abortion as a basic right and as health care serves everyone. I know certain people will never buy that and I don't get to decide that for others.
But what you point to reminds me of something Jessica Valenti told me:
For too long, we've had this sort of framework, we've accepted this Republican framework of "When is it okay to restrict abortion? When is it okay to legislate pregnancy?"
But when you ask people, "Do you want the government involved in pregnancy? Yes or no?" They overwhelmingly say no. The last study that came out was 81 percent of people when you say, "Do you want abortion regulated by the government?" They say "No."
****
If you put those in term's of women's health care, the number may be even higher. But it's already extremely high.
The idea of the FDA simply repealing approval of mifepristone is scary. Wouldn't there have to be some compliance with the Administrative Procedure Act to do that? Would a trump presidency have enough Congressional flunkies to repeal THAT Act? Of course, if trump is president there will be a lot more issues at stake than abortion. But I can see the dangers described here.
Mifepristone is used for other things than abortions. Would patients who need it for that reason be affected by the "repeal" by the FDA.
The Comstock Act seems to involve interstate mailing. Would it be construed to include things like Fed Ex or UPS? What about a simple truck or train shipment, say from the manufacturer to a pro choice state. Would it include, say, Instacart delivery in-state from your pharmacy to you in a pro-choice state?
Hi Susan,
Some further reading you may have already come across I found useful about how Project 2025 views these things:
https://msmagazine.com/2024/03/29/project-2025-trump-republicans-ban-abortion-pills-mifepristone-trump/
And on Comstock in general
https://jessica.substack.com/p/the-comstock-act
Activists were already advising individuals and states to stock up on pills. https://time.com/6272692/abortion-pill-stockpiling-democratic-states/
As Jessica notes in other parts of the interview, the "unknowns" of all these actions are part of the chilling effect. I'm frankly not sure about FDA's process on withdrawal of approval but it's basically the inverse of the case we saw in the Supreme Court earlier this year. And given current circumstances, we have to expect each Republican administration will get better and better at using administrative burdens to effectively remove or reduct access to not just but also misoprostol, for instance. Then Democrats, possibly, get power and attempt to reverse these actions as the situation keeps getting more dire.
thanks for the suggestions. I've saved them to read later.
It’s all about Medical Apartheid.
I wish we could put more focus and terminology on ‘Women’s Health Care.’ Too many people have a knee-jerk reaction to the word “abortion” as though all abortions are for people who want to kill babies - lazy careless people who don’t care. Not enough said that too often being pregnant is dangerous and life threatening to mother and child who are most in need of emergency health care. But instead are at the mercy of ignorant politicians.
My belief is that reclaiming the word abortion as a basic right and as health care serves everyone. I know certain people will never buy that and I don't get to decide that for others.
But what you point to reminds me of something Jessica Valenti told me:
https://www.patreon.com/posts/who-are-you-with-103020339
****
For too long, we've had this sort of framework, we've accepted this Republican framework of "When is it okay to restrict abortion? When is it okay to legislate pregnancy?"
But when you ask people, "Do you want the government involved in pregnancy? Yes or no?" They overwhelmingly say no. The last study that came out was 81 percent of people when you say, "Do you want abortion regulated by the government?" They say "No."
****
If you put those in term's of women's health care, the number may be even higher. But it's already extremely high.