Delia A. Deschaine, Member of the Firm in the Health Care & Life Sciences practice, in the firm’s Washington, DC, office, was quoted in Bloomberg Health Law & Business, in “Abortion Pill Lawsuit Offers Guide to Challenging State Limits,” by Celine Castronuovo. (Read the full version – subscription required.)

Following is an excerpt:

An ongoing lawsuit over Mississippi’s abortion pill restrictions could set a roadmap for the Biden administration and others seeking to ease access to the medication across the country as the US Supreme Court considers overturning Roe v. Wade.
GenBioPro, the manufacturer of generic mifepristone, contends the FDA’s regulations for dispensing and prescribing the pill preempt the state’s stricter requirements, including that a licensed physician prescribe it in person. Constitutional and FDA policy attorneys say that argument may have legs and could serve as a basis for any future lawsuits against state mifepristone restrictions.
“Courts have routinely granted deference to FDA” over states when determining under what conditions a drug can be used safely and effectively, said Delia Deschaine, an attorney at Epstein Becker & Green specializing in FDA regulations.
Mifepristone has gained focus as the administration and reproductive health advocacy groups brace for a potential high court decision overturning the landmark ruling that legalized abortion nationwide. FDA regulation of the pill wouldn’t change if Roe is overturned, but some legal battles could arise over states’ authority to put rules in place that go beyond those recommended by the federal agency.
A hearing is set for June 8 to consider Mississippi State Health Officer Thomas Dobbs’s motion to dismiss the GenBioPro case. …
Making the Case
The Zogenix case “stands for the position that a state law that significantly impedes access to an FDA-approved drug product is preempted by federal law,” Deschaine said. …
States’ Defense
Deschaine argued that because these two previous cases don’t explicitly deal with an FDA-approved drug, or the issue of abortion, there “are distinguishing factors that may impact the strength” of a state’s argument.

Jump to Page

Privacy Preference Center

When you visit any website, it may store or retrieve information on your browser, mostly in the form of cookies. This information might be about you, your preferences or your device and is mostly used to make the site work as you expect it to. The information does not usually directly identify you, but it can give you a more personalized web experience. Because we respect your right to privacy, you can choose not to allow some types of cookies. Click on the different category headings to find out more and change our default settings. However, blocking some types of cookies may impact your experience of the site and the services we are able to offer.

Strictly Necessary Cookies

These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually only set in response to actions made by you which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in or filling in forms. You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not then work. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable information.

Performance Cookies

These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They help us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site. All information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous. If you do not allow these cookies we will not know when you have visited our site, and will not be able to monitor its performance.