| Hi Rulers! Happy February! Send me your thoughts and ideas for this newsletter (and wildest NFL/Taylor Swift conspiracy theories): sgardner@politico.com. I've got a Q&A for you today: In just two months, the Supreme Court is slated to hear oral arguments in its first significant case on abortion since it overturned Roe v. Wade. The two consolidated cases — F.D.A. v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine and Danco Laboratories v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, could change how patients can access a popular abortion drug, Mifepristone, which is used in over half of abortions nationwide. The case challenges policies, made in recent years by the FDA, which allow the drug to be used until 10 weeks of pregnancy (the SCOTUS decision could roll that back to seven), and allow the drug to be prescribed online and mailed to patients. The case has broad implications in states that already have strict abortion bans, where some women rely on telehealth and mail to receive their medication. But it also has broad implications for states where abortion is legal, which could see an influx of patients from conservative states who are no longer able to access abortion medication through the mail. One of those states is New Mexico, which has already seen an exponential increase in abortions post-Dobbs, largely due to its sprawling border with Texas. By some estimates, it is the state where abortion has spiked the most. This week, I talked to New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham, a Democrat, about that challenge and her decision to sign onto an amicus brief, urging the Supreme Court to side with the FDA, with 21 other pro-abortion rights governors — a group known as the Reproductive Freedom Alliance. Here's our conversation, which has been edited for length and clarity. Gardner: New Mexico is a rural state. This decision might change residents' abilities to receive abortion medication through the mail. Are you concerned about having enough clinics in rural areas to meet demand? Lujan Grisham: This case has dire consequences for women's health, infections, having sufficient providers and getting them into rural New Mexico and into rural America. The goal is always to do the least intrusive work. Medicated abortions are the least intrusive. One thing that's getting lost here is that women — through no fault of their own — will continue to suffer miscarriages. Mifepristone is an effective medication to treat miscarriage management, without which there are other dire consequences, including the kind of issues and infections where women have ended up with full or partial hysterectomies. It's outrageous. This medication has to be available. Gardner: If the Supreme Court rules against the FDA, as governor, how will you handle that? Lujan Grisham: We’re all going to have to figure that out. The first line of offense here is to make sure that we show the legal issues. The FDA is responsible for aiding states with its decision making and its role in any number of public health efforts. The HPV vaccine is another critical example. Make no mistake, I think that could be at risk. I think birth control pills and condoms could be at risk. I will do, legally and ethically, whatever it takes to protect women and their families in New Mexico, but it's uncharted territory, for sure. So the objective here is to make sure that our legal arguments win the day. Gardner: New Mexico has had an experience that somewhat reflects what’s going on nationally. I know you had several towns create anti-abortion ordinances. Specifically, I’m thinking of Edgewood, which created an ordinance that was intended to bar the reception of abortion drugs or other abortion-related items by mail. Can you speak a bit about how you handled that? Lujan Grisham: The Dobbs decision itself opened the door to finding any mechanism to prevent reproductive health care access. And anti-abortion advocates certainly exist in my state, but I'm going to talk about the legal aspect. Now, we're interfering with the mail. By that logic, you could, say, not be allowed to get Viagra by mail potentially somewhere. Or adult information. You could ban certain books people get by mail. It would have far reaching consequences. You cannot do that, legally. They've been told they can't do it, but they're gonna keep doing it because it's really a political stunt. We make sure that everyone in the community knows that there's no enforcement. But it’s the consequence, again, of Dobbs. Gardner: If SCOTUS restricts the ability to mail Mifepristone, are you worried about a possible influx of patients from other states? Would that strain New Mexico's resources? Lujan Grisham: We will work to be prepared. It's one of the reasons I invested in building a clinic. We're gonna have to expand access and care and all of these clinical services that do the full range of reproductive health services, including abortion. This will no doubt have a huge impact. Already, 72 percent of the abortions in New Mexico are for Texas residents. Gardner: We saw that Dobbs had a major impact on the 2022 midterms. Whichever way this case goes, do you think it will impact the 2024 election? Lujan Grisham: I do. And we'll have to see if our speculations are right, but based on the current polling for women, in a Biden-Trump match-up, you can see the shift. They’re not talking about women's health care access in the Republican primary, because it's not a good issue for them. Because in my eyes, they're wrong on this issue. And they're wrong about the American sentiment on this issue. I think it'll play a primary role in the outcomes of the election and in voter participation. This is an issue that bridges all socio-economic status when a lot of issues don't.
| 
Comments
Post a Comment