The Trump administration has asked a federal judge to throw out a lawsuit from Missouri, Idaho and Kansas seeking to limit access to mifepristone, a widely used abortion pill. Justice Department lawyers argue that the lawsuit was improperly filed in a Texas court and lacks the legal basis to proceed.
In a filing submitted to the U.S. District Court in Amarillo, government attorneys said the three Republican-led states have no meaningful connection to the court’s jurisdiction. They also contend the states filed their challenge too late, targeting Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations that were finalized as far back as 2016 and 2021.
Venue and Timing at the Center of Legal Dispute
At the heart of the government’s motion is a procedural argument: Amarillo is not the proper venue for this lawsuit. None of the plaintiff states are located in Texas, and the FDA decisions they seek to overturn were made in Washington, D.C., with nationwide effect.
“The states are asking a court with no relevant ties to the case to roll back FDA rules that have been in place for years,” the Justice Department argued. “They must bring their challenge in a proper venue — and within the legal timeframe.”
This position continues the Biden administration’s defense of the FDA, showing continuity on the issue despite the change in leadership. Legal experts note that federal agencies often retain consistent legal strategies in ongoing cases to maintain institutional credibility.
States Challenge FDA’s Mifepristone Rules
The lawsuit targets changes the FDA made to mifepristone regulations in 2016 and 2021. These changes expanded access to the medication, allowing it to be prescribed through telehealth, sent by mail, and used up to 10 weeks into pregnancy — up from the previous seven-week limit.
Missouri, Idaho and Kansas argue these relaxed rules clash with their state laws restricting abortion. They also claim that the widespread distribution of abortion pills increases costs for their public health systems.
Case’s Long Legal History
The current lawsuit traces back to a 2022 case filed by anti-abortion doctors and advocacy groups, who challenged the FDA’s approval and regulation of mifepristone. That case reached the Supreme Court, which in 2024 dismissed it on the grounds that the plaintiffs lacked legal standing to sue. After the original plaintiffs exited, the three states stepped in to continue the case.
Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, the federal judge in Amarillo known for conservative rulings, allowed the states to intervene. But both the Biden and Trump administrations have argued that the states, like the original plaintiffs, lack standing and are now time-barred from bringing their claims.
Politics and Policy
Despite defending the FDA in court, the Trump administration has not formally declared its position on future access to mifepristone. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said in January that President Trump had ordered a safety review of abortion pills but had made no final decisions on regulatory changes.
The case is being closely watched as a test of how far states can go in challenging federal drug regulations and whether courts can be used to restrict access to abortion medication after the fall of Roe v. Wade.
According to the Guttmacher Institute, mifepristone — typically used in combination with misoprostol — accounted for over 60% of all U.S. abortions in 2023.
.jpg)
.jpg)
