Skip to main content

Texas Judge Outlaws Mifepristone - Judicial Activism Roars Ahead

A federal judge in Texas recently issued a ruling that would ban mifepristone by nullifying the Food and Drug Administration’s original approval of this medicine, which occurred 23 years ago. Mifepristone is one of two drugs that are used for medical abortions.  If this decision is ultimately upheld, it would ban this FDA approved drug throughout the country. Ironically, on the very same day, another federal judge in Washington state issued a contradictory ruling that would protect mifepristone’s status as an approved medicine. 

An appellate court ruled a few days later that mifepristone's approved status remained valid, although prior restrictions on its use would be resumed.  This past Friday, the Supreme Court gave mifepristone a 5 day reprieve giving time for both sides to submit briefs days from now.  

Will the Supreme Court deliver peace in the valley?  Not at all.  We have all painfully learned since the Roe v Wade decision of 1973 that a judicial determination may not resolve a societal dispute.  Indeed, many experts and others believe that the Supremes should have delayed weighing in on abortion until the nation made some progress politically.  Roe didn’t bring the nation together on this raw and divisive issue. Instead, it became grist for both sides to dig in and demonize the other side.  In contrast, when the Court decided in 2015 that gay marriages were constitutionally protected, the nation had largely already accepted this so the Court’s decision basically ratified public sentiment rather than inflame it. Had the court issued the same gay marriage decision 20 years ago, public reaction to it would have been quite different.


More division on the way.

Though I am not an attorney, I find the Texas judge’s decision on mifepristone to be highly tendentious and problematic.  Considering the judge’s background, known views and the specific language he used in his decision,  I suspect that he prejudged the case, which is anathema to a judge’s solemn commitment to be impartial.  And I thought that political conservatives decried judicial activism!

As is so often the case, folks who support a court’s decision will praise a judge for his or her integrity, judicial modesty and wisdom.  Guess what folks say about a judge when they disagree with the outcome?  The public should not judge judges or juries based on outcomes but on the process.  Was the proceeding fair?  Was the decision based on the facts and the law?  Was competent counsel present?   A court’s responsibility is not to save jobs or save green space or save puppies.  These laudable goals should be addressed by other means.  Courts make legal determinations – they are not policy instruments.  Increasingly, folks are looking for the courts to offer remedies to many of society’s ills.  Lobby your legislators instead. 

Mifepristone was deemed to be safe and effective by the FDA over 2 decades ago.  The FDA followed all of its exhaustive protocols.  The agency is afforded wide discretion over its processes and actions, as it should.  There are so many other drugs out there, including chemotherapy agents and biologic medicines just to offer two examples, that are less safe and effective than mifepristone, but yet there is no outcry against them.  Wonder why?

The judiciary should not be interfering with medical and scientific processes that are far beyond its knowledge and purview.  If you want to make mifepristone illegal because you oppose abortion, then pass a law to accomplish this. (Of course, be prepared for a legal challenge.)  Don’t do a dishonest end run around the truth by having a judge declare that the FDA process 23 years ago was flawed.  Does anyone actually believe that the Texas plaintiffs filed this lawsuit because of alleged FDA errors decades ago?

 

 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Becoming a Part-Time Physician

Next month my schedule will change.  I will henceforth be off on Fridays with my work week truncated to Monday through Thursday.   I am excited to be enjoying a long weekend every weekend.  And while the schedule change is relatively minor, this event does feel like an important career moment for me.  It is the first step on a journey that will ultimately lead beyond my professional career.  It is this recognition that makes this modest schedule modification more significant than one would think it deserves.  As some readers know,   my current employed position has been a dream job for me.   Prior to this, I was in a small private practice, which I loved, but was much more challenging professionally and personally.   My partner and I ran the business.   Working nights, weekends and holidays were routine for decades.   On an on-call night, if I slept  through until morning, I felt as if I had won the lottery.   And w...

When Should Doctors Retire?

I am asked with some regularity whether I am aiming to retire in the near term.  Years ago, I never received such inquiries.  Why now?   Might it be because my coiffure and goatee – although finely-manicured – has long entered the gray area?  Could it be because many other even younger physicians have given up their stethoscopes for lives of leisure? (Hopefully, my inquiring patients are not suspecting me of professional performance lapses!) Interestingly, a nurse in my office recently approached me and asked me sotto voce that she heard I was retiring.    “Interesting,” I remarked.   Since I was unaware of this retirement news, I asked her when would be my last day at work.   I have no idea where this erroneous rumor originated from.   I requested that my nurse-friend contact her flawed intel source and set him or her straight.   Retirement might seem tempting to me as I have so many other interests.   Indeed, reading and ...

Personal Responsibility for Health

One of the advantages of the computer era is that patients and physicians can communicate via a portal system.  A patient can submit an inquiry which I typically respond to promptly.  It also offers me the opportunity to provide advice or test results to patients.  Moreover, the system documents that the patient has in fact read my message.  Beyond the medical value, it also provides some legal protection if it is later alleged that ‘my doctor never sent me my results’.  I have always endorsed the concept that patients must accept personal responsibility.   Consider this hypothetical example. A patient undergoes a screening colonoscopy and a polyp is removed.   The patient is told to expect a portal message detailing the results in the coming days.   Once the analysis of the polyp has been completed, the doctor sends a message via the portal communicating that the polyp is benign, but is regarded as ‘precancerous'.   The patient is advise...