Gov. J.B. Pritzker and Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul say the abortion drug mifepristone will continue to be available in Illinois while a federal court battle rages in two other states over the legality of the pill.
Mifepristone, which was approved by the federal Food and Drug Administration in 2000, is now the subject of opposing legal rulings by federal judges.
In Texas, U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, has ordered a hold on federal approval of the drug.
In Washington state, U.S. District Judge Thomas O. Rice, a Barack Obama appointee, ordered federal authorities to not make any changes that would jeopardize access in the 17 states where Democrats had sued to retain access to the drug.
Illinois — where all of the top elected office-holders are Democrats who support reproductive rights — has become a haven as abortion access has been restricted in the Midwest since the U.S. Supreme Court ruling last year reversing the landmark Roe vs. Wade decision.
Raoul called the Texas ruling “legally unsound” and pledged that Illinois patients would still have access to mifepristone while the legal battles continue.
“I will continue to fight to protect access to medication abortion and for the right of women — in Illinois and beyond our borders — to make their own reproductive health decisions,” Raoul said.
Pritzker said that, in Illinois, access to reproductive health services remains intact despite the Texas court ruling.
“Thanks to the Washington decision, nothing has changed in Illinois,” Pritzker said.
Jennifer Welch, president and chief executive officer of Planned Parenthood of Illinois, said Planned Parenthood Illinois has served patients from 34 states since the Roe decision was overturned last year and that the Texas ruling potentially could see that number rise as more people need to travel for reproductive healthcare.
Welch said Saturday that Planned Parenthood will continue to provide access to abortions regardless of the outcome of the suits regarding mifepristone or similar drugs.
“That just means more people will have more financial hardships,” Welch said. “We know the medical system in the United States disproportionately harms Black and Brown people in our country. So not only is it an attack on people who can get pregnant but also an extra hardship for people who’ve been underrepresented by the medical system.”
Welch said the ruling is an “escalation” in the battle against not just reproductive rights and also other medical rights and bodily autonomy.
“The conservatives who are creating abortion restrictions and rolling back access to gender-affirming care all over the country have shown us they fully intend to attack other medications,” Welch said. “The judicial overreach in cases like this threaten all medications in the country but especially medications for sexual and reproductive health.”
U.S. Rep. Mary Miller — a downstate Republican and outspoken abortion opponent, who called the reversal of Roe a “win for white life,” though she later walked it back as “right to life” — tweeted Saturday in support of the Texas ruling.
“Praise God for the important court decision blocking dangerous at-home abortion pills,” Miller wrote. “This is an important step in exposing the cruel chemical abortion industry, which is preying upon young women.”
U.S. Sen. Tammy Duckworth was among other Illinois Democratic office-holders who criticized the Texas ruling.
“Access to this critical medication that millions of Americans rely on was stripped away with a stroke of a pen by a single person who was handpicked by Republican extremists dead-set on a nationwide abortion ban,” Duckworth said. “If one judge in Texas can make a political decision that takes this off the shelves, what’s to stop another judge somewhere else from doing the same thing to insulin or any other prescription drug?”
On Saturday,before leaving Nashville, where she had gone to visit two Black lawmakers ousted from the state house, Vice President Kamala Harris said in a written statement regarding the Texas court ruling: “It is contrary to what makes for good public health policy to allow courts and politicians to tell the FDA what it should do.”
