A new legislation that labels abortion drugs as restricted hazardous substances has led to a lawsuit against the state from a coalition of Louisiana healthcare practitioners and proponents of reproductive rights.
The law, which went into effect a month ago, adds the two pills used in a medical abortion, mifepristone and misoprostol, to Louisiana’s list of “Schedule IV” medications. Additionally, several sedatives, opioids, and stimulants fall within this group.
Abortion pills are being categorized as restricted drugs for the first time by a state.
Since abortion is essentially illegal in Louisiana, the law hasn’t had a significant effect on access to abortion.
Abortions are permitted in some special situations, though, and doctors frequently give misoprostol and mifepristone off-label to treat miscarriages. Additionally, misoprostol by itself is authorized to prevent stomach ulcers.
According to Allison Zimmer, an attorney for the plaintiffs, the pharmaceuticals are classified as Schedule IV narcotics in Louisiana, which means that hospitals must store the tablets in a safe facility and that doctors must have a specific authorization to dispense them.
Anyone found in possession of the drugs without a prescription faces a $5,000 fine and a maximum sentence of five years in prison. (The law does, however, provide pregnant women who have the drugs for their personal use a wide exemption.)
According to the current complaint, which was filed on Thursday, the law may make it more difficult for medical professionals to promptly deliver misoprostol and mifepristone in an emergency, which might delay patients’ access to the medications and increase the risk of injury.
Since individuals with comparable serious medical requirements are not subject to the same delays if they require other prescriptions, the complaint also claims that the rule discriminates against those who need the pharmaceuticals. It aims to stop the application of the legislation.
“It will only make having a number of physical conditions or being pregnant more dangerous,” Zimmer stated.
The Birthmark Doula Collective, a Louisiana doula service that supports expectant mothers, two reproductive rights campaigners, a physician, and a pharmacist are among the plaintiffs. The state, the attorney general, the board of medical examiners, and the board of pharmacy are listed as defendants.
According to Nancy Davis, one of the two campaigners who filed the lawsuit, “the law is supposed to prevent misuse of the medications, but the real aim is to make abortion harder to access.”
The American College of Medical Toxicology states that misoprostol and mifepristone are not considered restricted substances. Labeling the medicines as such was “not consistent with decades of scientific evidence,” the group cautioned in September, and it established a hazardous precedent of “politicizing pharmaceutical regulation.”
However, on Friday, Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill remained in favor of the legislation.
“This law is unquestionably constitutional. In a statement, Murrill declared, “We will vigorously defend it.”
Abortions are only permitted in Louisiana if the fetus is not likely to survive or if terminating the pregnancy will save the life of the expectant mother or avoid a major health danger.
“This is an example of the state trying to demonstrate as much as possible that it is an anti-abortion state,” Zimmer said of the new categorization for abortion drugs.
The statute was created in reaction to a specific case in Texas involving Catherine Herring, the sister of Louisiana Senator Thomas Pressly, whose husband was charged with putting abortion pills in her beverages. The infant lived, and Herring’s husband entered a guilty plea to charges of assaulting a pregnant woman and causing harm to a child. Giving a pregnant woman abortion pills on purpose without her knowledge or agreement is classified as “coerced abortion,” according to Louisiana law.
In a statement, Murrill said, “Ms. Herring’s brave testimony demonstrated how easy access to these drugs can be harmful to pregnant women and exposes women to the risks of coercion, abuse, and criminal behavior.”
Abortion pills were not classified as controlled substances when Pressly first introduced the bill; this was added later as an amendment, which Pressly claimed at the time was an additional step “to control the rampant illegal distribution of abortion-inducing drugs that ended up hurting my sister.”
However, according to the current complaint, the modification isn’t directly related to the original measure, therefore the statute should be repealed. According to Zimmer, the amendment was adopted “so late in the legislative process that no public hearing was held.”
According to the lawsuit, before the bill was approved, Davis and another plaintiff, Kaitlyn Joshua, were not given the chance to testify before lawmakers.
Joshua, a 32-year-old resident of Baton Rouge, said that after she began miscarrying at about 11 weeks in 2022, she was turned away from two ERs. She fears that more Louisiana women, especially Black women, may be denied care as a result of the policy.
Joshua stated, “I am aware that women who already reside in maternal health care deserts and who look like me will be disproportionately impacted by this current law.”
