Family Research Council President Tony Perkins responded on April 8 to a federal court decision regarding a lawsuit that challenges the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) regulations for the abortion drug mifepristone. The case, brought by Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill, was heard by Judge David Joseph of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana.
The ruling matters because it addresses state concerns over federal policies governing access to chemical abortion drugs. Judge Joseph found that Louisiana has standing to sue and is likely to show that previous FDA rules on mifepristone are unlawful, but he stopped short of granting full relief while allowing time for an FDA review.
Perkins said, “Even the court acknowledged the destruction caused by the FDA policy on chemical abortion.” He continued, “This decision reveals the truth about what is occurring: states are currently being irreparably harmed and undermined by the ongoing existence of dangerous abortion drug trafficking enabled by President Biden’s FDA. As the court noted in its ruling, Louisiana has standing to bring this lawsuit because it has suffered harm from these Biden-era FDA rules.”
He also commented on the next steps required from federal regulators: “In deference to the executive branch, the court agreed to allow the FDA to complete the review it has promised, but the FDA has not even indicated whether this review has started to this day. The court has given the FDA no more than six months to report on its progress. The court’s message seems to be ‘we are watching!'” Perkins quoted further from Judge Joseph’s opinion: “As it said, ‘the stay granted to FDA will not remain open-ended. FDA has an obligation to act with all deliberate speed… The parties and American public deserve nothing less.'”
Perkins added his perspective regarding state laws: “In fact, moms and unborn children of Louisiana deserve substantially more–namely, for the federal government to respect… Louisiana [laws], which recognize dignity of every person… whether born or unborn.” He concluded with concern about future regulatory action: “Given … current administration [FDA] actions … we are not optimistic they will continue a timely and thorough review. We support … appealing… as this is an urgent matter of life and death for women and children.”
The Family Research Council filed an amicus brief in support of Louisiana alongside psychiatrist Dr. Martha Shuping arguing that relaxed regulations have allowed widespread distribution of abortion drugs without direct medical oversight or safeguards against coercion.
Broader implications could emerge depending on how quickly or thoroughly federal agencies respond within their allotted timeline; further appeals may follow as both sides seek resolution.
