NewsA federal judge on Tuesday paused Louisiana’s bid to reinstate stricter dispensing rules for the abortion pill mifepristone, staying the case while the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) conducts an ongoing review of the drug’s safety.
Writing for the District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, Judge David C. Joseph declined to block the current rules, instead pausing the case to allow the FDA to complete a safety review it had committed to before the lawsuit was filed. The ruling granted the Defendant’s motion to stay the case pending completion of the FDA’s review, and denied the Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary relief without prejudice. The ruling however noted that the stay is not indefinite, explaining that the court’s analysis would shift if the FDA fails to act with “all deliberate speed.”
At issue is a 2023 FDA rule change which allowed mifepristone, an abortion pill previously required to be dispensed in person, to be prescribed via telehealth and delivered by mail. Louisiana, which bans nearly all abortions, argued that the rule unlawfully enabled out-of-state providers to ship the drug to its residents. Louisiana’s lawsuit, filed last October, challenged the FDA’s January 2023 Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) for mifepristone under the Administrative Procedure Act, arguing the agency acted arbitrarily and capriciously when it removed the in-person dispensing requirement. Louisiana claimed concrete injury including sovereign harm from an effective circumvention of the state’s abortion laws, and financial harm through over $92,000 in Medicaid costs tied to mifepristone-related emergency room cases in 2025.
Tuesday’s memorandum ruling first addressed the threshold issue of standing. In FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, the Supreme Court dismissed a similar APA challenge in June 2024 after finding that the plaintiff doctors and medical associations lacked a personal stake in the FDA’s actions. Here, Judge Joseph found Louisiana’s position to be different, concluding that the state had demonstrated both sovereign and financial injury which traces back to the 2023 rule change. The court further found Louisiana likely to succeed on the merits, citing arguments made in the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in FDA v. Alliance. The court further noted that Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and FDA Commissioner Martin Makary had previously acknowledged deficiencies in REMS approvals and committed to a comprehensive safety review.
However, despite finding standing and a likely path to success on the merits, the court on Tuesday declined to issue interim relief to Louisiana. The court concluded that allowing the FDA to complete its review served the public’s interest more than judicial intervention, warning against what it called “government by lawsuit.” The ruling ordered the FDA to file a status report within six months and to notify the court within fourteen days of completing its review.
This comes amidst ongoing tension and legals battles surrounding access to abortion services. Last February, a Louisiana grand jury indicted a New York doctor for enabling the termination of a minor’s pregnancy by prescribing mifepristone, while other states have called for expanded access to abortion medications.
