1 Trending: ‘Round River’ FBI Op Was A Deep State Conspiracy To Thwart Investigation Into Biden Family Corruption

2 Trending: Hegseth Orders Task Force To Probe DEI Indoctrination At America’s War Colleges

3 Trending: The Crisis In The Strait Of Hormuz Is Worse Because Of Dems’ Disastrous Energy Policy

4 Trending: Trump Needs To Prepare Americans For What Comes Next In Iran

Trump DOJ Demands Pause On Another Lawsuit Challenging FDA’s Abortion Pill Permissions

This is not the first time the Trump administration has moved to pause or dismiss pro-life states’ pleas for legal intervention.

Share Article on Facebook

Share Article on Twitter

Share Article on Truth Social

Share Article via Email

The Trump administration Department of Justice says women and babies whose lives and safety are threatened by popular abortion pills should have to wait until after U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s review of the popular abortion drug mifepristone to get relief.

The DOJ is redirecting its demands for a court-mandated pause on abortion pill lawsuits from the landmark Louisiana v. FDA case to take aim at Texas and Florida for challenging the FDA’s 2000 approval of mifepristone and subsequent expansions. It is under the Biden administration’s 2023 radical mifepristone permissions that anyone in any state can order mail-order pregnancy-ending pills and complete at-home abortions without medical oversight.

In its memorandum filed on Friday, the DOJ demanded the court “stay this litigation pending the outcome of FDA’s review” or dismiss the complaint altogether.

“Florida and Texas (Plaintiffs) threaten to short-circuit the agency’s orderly review and study of the safety risks of mifepristone,” the memo claims. “They would have this Court set aside the 2000 approval of mifepristone and subsequent actions modifying the conditions of use (including the REMS) and approving generic equivalents — all without the benefit of FDA’s new review of the mifepristone REMS. And if FDA ultimately decides to change course, judicial relief may prove equally unnecessary and disruptive.” (REMS stands for Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies.)

Both U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and FDA Commissioner Marty Makary pledged to review safety concerns surrounding the most popular abortion drug on the market, including one analysis that found more than one in 10 women who take mifepristone suffer a serious adverse event such as hemorrhage or infection.

It’s unclear, however, how much progress the FDA has made on the review. Sen. Josh Hawley told The Federalist last month that, despite previously confirming that the mifepristone review is in “data acquisition phase,” the FDA is “not even reviewing any data yet.” The FDA’s lack of action prompted Hawley to introduce legislation last week to strip mifepristone of its FDA approval for abortions and give survivors a legal remedy against foreign abortion pill makers.

This is not the first time the Trump administration has moved to pause or dismiss pro-life states’ pleas for legal intervention so they can properly enforce their chemical abortion prohibitions.

The DOJ filed a similar memorandum in January claiming that Louisiana’s legal challenge to the REMs expansions is “disruptive” and possibly “unnecessary” due to the agency’s ongoing mifepristone review. The DOJ, on behalf of the FDA, asked a federal court to halt the lawsuit from Louisiana and abortion pill poisoning survivor Rosalie Markezich.

As pro-lifers and the plaintiffs’ legal counsel noted, the FDA does not plan to act on those REMs until it concludes its official abortion drug evaluation, which leaves countless unborn babies and women vulnerable to the harms and abuse linked to mifepristone.

“The DOJ, consistent with its brief in this case, actually made no effort to defend the 2023 REMs or to reassure the court that the FDA actions in 2023 were even lawful,” Gabriella McIntyre, legal counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom’s Center for Life, told The Federalist in a phone interview after the Louisiana v. FDA preliminary injunction hearing on Feb. 24.

U.S. District Judge David C. Joseph of the Western District of Louisiana has yet to say whether he will grant relief for or side with the Trump administration. McIntyre expressed optimism, however, that the judge will consider the 5th Circuit’s conclusions that 2023 REMs are unlawful and issue his opinion swiftly.

“We outlined in opposition an extensive timeline to the court where, even if they were to move on this study right now today, given their current timeline and the regulatory process, we would not see any sort of conclusion or relief from the FDA until 2027,” McIntyre said, noting that relief would most likely “stay the 2023 REMs nationally.”

She warned that every month that the mail-order expansions are allowed to stand, “nearly 1,000 unborn lives are destroyed in the state of Louisiana, and 700-plus women who are going to go to the emergency room.”

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Pew’s Latest Poll Tries To Hide Americans’ Hesitancy About Unlimited Abortion, Mifepristone

If Mail-Order Abortion Existed 40 Years Ago, I Probably Wouldn’t Be Here

Trump Admin Can’t ‘Make America Healthy Again’ Without Abortion Pill Restrictions

Washington State Giving Away $2M In Abortion Pills So Stockpile Doesn’t ‘Go To Waste’

No, Republicans Don’t Need To ‘Change’ The Senate Rules To Pass The SAVE America Act

California Fights To Screen Men For Cervical Cancer

Senate Will Only Pass SAVE America Act If Trump And Thune Impose Consequences For Opposing It

‘Beautiful Chaos Of A Mother’s Heart’: Jessie Buckley Uses Oscar Speech To Honor Husband, Daughter

Visit The Federalist on Facebook

Visit The Federalist on Twitter

Visit The Federalist on Instagram

Watch The Federalist on YouTube

View The Federalist RSS Feed

Listen to The Federalist Podcast

© 2026 The Federalist, A wholly independent division of FDRLST Media. All rights reserved.

Visit The Federalist on Facebook

Visit The Federalist on Twitter

Visit The Federalist on Instagram

Watch The Federalist on YouTube

View The Federalist RSS Feed

Listen to The Federalist Podcast

© The Federalist