A lawyer representing the plaintiffs in the medication abortion lawsuit in Texas called Friday’s ruling “a significant victory,” but said that he is not yet sure how a separate ruling in a Washington state case could conflict with it.
“The FDA never had the authority to approve these hazardous drugs and remove important safeguards. This is a significant victory for the doctors and medical associations we represent and more importantly, the health and safety of women and girls,” Erik Baptist, an attorney with Alliance Defending Freedom, which is representing the abortion pill challengers, told reporters following the ruling.
Baptist said he has not yet looked at the ruling out of Washington that directly conflicts with the Texas ruling.
“I’m still digesting the court’s decision from the Northern District of Texas. I have not had an opportunity to review the Washington state decision to see how it may or may not impact the court’s decision in our litigation in Texas,” he said.
“I’m not sure whether there’s a direct conflict yet and with the Washington state decision just because I haven’t read it yet, but there may not be a direct conflict,” he added later. “But if there is a direct conflict then there may be – it may be inevitably going to Supreme Court, but I’m not convinced that it’s necessary at this point to make that conclusion.”
Asked about the seven-day stay issued by Kacsmaryk in the case, Baptist said: “The court was recognizing and acknowledging that the government had already asked that and proceeded to give it. So it’s a reasonable relief that the court gave to the government to seek that appeal in the interim.”
