The Legal Battle Over the Abortion Pill

More than half of abortions in the U.S. are medication abortions -- a two-pill regimen that is used to terminate pregnancies through 10 weeks of gestation. Mifepristone is also used off-label to help patients experiencing miscarriages or stillbirths expel pregnancy tissue and avoid procedures.

But federal court rulings have raised questions about the future availability of mifepristone, which was approved by the Food and Drug Administration 23 years ago, and the FDA's future ability to approve and regulate medicines. 

Managing Editor Lori Robertson and Science Editor Jessica McDonald answer some of those questions in "Q&A on the Medication Abortion Court Rulings."

Lori and Jess explain the legal and health issues raised by the lawsuit, which was brought by four anti-abortion organizations and four physicians. They explain how mifepristone works when combined with misoprostol, when it was approved and its history of regulation.

They also answer questions such as: "How safe and effective is mifepristone?" As they write, 22 clinical trials, including seven in the U.S., have evaluated mifepristone when used with misoprostol at 10 weeks or less of gestation. The results show patients have a complete medical abortion at least 96.2% of the time, meaning the drug fails in less than 4% of cases. 

Jess interviewed the senior author of one of those papers -- a paper cited by the District Court judge's ruling in Texas -- who told her that the research shows an "impressive safety" record of "medical abortion, even if provided via telemedicine.”

The Q&A also tackles what's next in the legal battle. 

Reader: Who fact checks you guys?

FactCheck.org Director Eugene Kiely: You do. All of our stories attribute our information to reputable sources and provide links to our source data, reports etc. That's for our staff to check the facts in our articles prior to publication and for our readers to check our facts, too. If you find any inaccurate information in our stories, you can contact us at [email protected] or [email protected] and put the word "correction" in the subject line. Be sure to be specific. Provide a link to our article and the information that you believe is in error. 

In addition, FactCheck.org is a verified signatory of the International Fact-Checking Network at the Poynter Institute. IFCN promotes fact-checking standards through its code of principles. Verified signatories are evaluated annually. The most recent IFCN assessment of FactCheck.org is available here.

If you believe we are in violation of the IFCN code of principles, you can file a complaint with the IFCN here. 

Wrapping Up

Here's what else we've got for you this week:

• "Posts Exaggerate Lab Findings About COVID-19’s Impact on Immune System": Outside of long COVID or very severe cases, most research suggests COVID-19 doesn’t cause lasting damage to the immune system. A few studies have found evidence of some possible damage, but nothing as severe as an immunodeficiency. People on social media, however, are misinterpreting a recent study to incorrectly claim COVID-19 is HIV-like. 
• "Posts Distort Possible Sentencing for Trump in Manhattan Indictment": Former President Donald Trump pleaded not guilty on April 4 to a 34-count indictment charging him with falsifying business records to conceal alleged hush money payments. Social media posts misleadingly claim Trump is “facing up to 30+ years” in prison if convicted. But legal experts said it is unlikely Trump would serve any time in prison. 
• "Posts Make Misleading Claims About Bill to Protect LGBTQ+ Events in Ontario": Four members of a minority party in the Legislative Assembly of Ontario introduced a bill on April 4 that would create temporary community safety zones around drag performance venues to prevent “acts of intimidation.” But online posts misleadingly claimed Canada has already passed a law that “made it illegal to protest against” the LGBTQ+ community. 
• "Fewer Cases of Flu Due to Pandemic Precautions, Contrary to Viral Claim": Public health organizations have explained that the reason there were far fewer cases of the flu in 2020 and 2021 was likely due to measures adopted to slow the spread of the virus that causes COVID-19, such as handwashing and social distancing. But a post on social media has spread the false claim that the dip in flu cases suggests that COVID-19 was a hoax.