‘A VERY DANGEROUS PRECEDENT’ — Texas Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk’s ruling to rescind the approval of the abortion drug mifepristone Friday spooked federal officials — and not just for what it could mean for access to the most popular method of terminating a pregnancy in the U.S. While the Biden administration has already appealed to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, many fear it could set the nation down a path of unwinding FDA’s regulatory authority for other vital products, such as insulin, vaccines and Alzheimer’s therapies, your hosts and POLITICO’s Megan Messerly and Alice Miranda Ollstein report. But the decision cites problems with the FDA’s procedures around mifepristone’s approval, such as the agency’s delayed response to petitions from anti-abortion organizations asking the agency to reconsider its accelerated approval more than 20 years ago. And this, Donley warns, could open the door for others to scrutinize aspects of key drug approvals by the nation’s pharmaceutical regulator, said Greer Donley, associate professor at the University of Pittsburgh law school. Jane Henney, the FDA commissioner when mifepristone was approved, said Monday that “this ruling sets a very dangerous precedent for the FDA’s authority in terms of other new medications.” Dueling rulings: The same day as the Texas ruling, U.S. District Court Judge Thomas Rice in the Eastern District of Washington state issued a conflicting order that blocks the FDA from taking mifepristone off the market. On the one hand, this ruling could require the FDA to use its enforcement discretion, meaning it would not take action on manufacturers or distributors continuing to sell mifepristone. But on the other hand, the second ruling might not be enough to convince all potentially liable entities to risk providing access to the drug, said Andrew Pincus, a visiting lecturer at Yale Law School and an experienced Supreme Court and appellate attorney. Even pharma is bracing itself: If the case makes it to the Supreme Court — which could happen based on the contradiction of the two rulings — pharmaceutical companies would likely rally behind the FDA. “If that were to survive through sort of a theoretical SCOTUS challenge, you really have to look at Congress to ensure we get back to having FDA in the driver’s seat here,” John Murphy, chief policy officer and deputy general counsel of healthcare at the trade group Biotechnology Innovation Organization, said. IT'S TUESDAY. WELCOME TO PRESCRIPTION PULSE. One unintended consequence of working from home? A swelling rat population in the District. Send news, tips and pest control tricks to David Lim (dlim@politico.com or @davidalim) or Katherine Ellen Foley (kfoley@politico.com or @katherineefoley). TODAY ON OUR PULSE CHECK PODCAST, host Ben Leonard talks with Alice Miranda Ollstein, who unpacks the legal turmoil following differing federal court decisions on the abortion pill mifepristone.
|
Comments
Post a Comment