States have a primary role in keeping women safe from chemical abortion drugs, Heartbeat tells federal appeals court

Image Source: Just The Facts

By Lisa Bourne - Posted at Pregnancy Help News:

Published August 30, 2024

Heartbeat International has weighed in on a case in federal court with implications for states’ rights to regulate chemical abortion pills.

Heartbeat filed an amicus brief August 19 in Bryant v. Stein urging the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth District to reverse a district court decision finding that federal law preempts North Carolina’s law regulating chemical abortion and to affirm the law to the extent the district court had left the regulation in place. The right for states to set abortion policy was reaffirmed with the 2022 Dobbs ruling overturning Roe v. Wade.

“FDA regulation does not mark the beginning and the end of protections for an individual’s health in a medical setting,” the Heartbeat brief argues, and “the states also have a primary role in the regulation of medical care …” The legal non-profit Thomas More Society (TMS) filed the brief on behalf of Heartbeat International.

“North Carolina’s laws protecting the unborn from abortion are not preempted,” the document states. “Moreover, the chemical abortion regimen approved by the FDA presents great risks to pregnant women. Nothing about the FDA’s approval of a drug demands that a state permit the procedures in which the drug may be used.”

Heartbeat’s brief goes on to argue that chemical abortion “is dangerous to women and legitimately subject to being outlawed or otherwise regulated by a state, such as North Carolina.”

Continue here.

See also:

• FDA says pharmacies may distribute abortion pills (christian-heritage-news.com)