A federal court has confirmed that a North Dakota-based pharmacy is not required to prescribe abortion-inducing drugs, rendering the litigation moot in light of revised standards from the Biden administration.
In March 2023, the Catholic-run independent Mayo Pharmacy of Bismarck was added to a lawsuit that the State of Texas filed against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services over a mandate requiring pharmacies to provide abortion drugs.
In a memorandum opinion released last week, U.S. District Judge David Counts of the Western District of Texas concluded that the Mayo Pharmacy would not have to provide abortion drugs.
Get Our Latest News for FREE
Subscribe to get daily/weekly email with the top stories (plus special offers!) from The Christian Post. Be the first to know.
Since new guidance issued by the Biden administration exempted pharmacies like Mayo from providing the drugs, the lawsuit is moot.
“In sum, it’s hard for this Court to conclude that, based on the Revised Pharmacy Guidance’s textual changes and Defendants’ in-person concessions, Plaintiffs are under some legal obligation here to dispense drugs for abortion purposes,” read the opinion.
“[A] win for Plaintiffs would mean that the Revised Guidance does not require Plaintiffs to dispense drugs for abortion purposes. In contrast (or not), a win for Defendants would also mean that the Revised Guidance does not require Plaintiffs to dispense drugs for abortion purposes.”
The opinion stated, “Plaintiffs have received everything they asked for; they should take the win. As a result, the issues are now moot and the Court lacks jurisdiction.”
Mayo and its Catholic owner were represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal group that has successfully argued cases before the U.S. Supreme Court.
ADF Senior Counsel Matt Bowman said in a statement Friday that “the court made it clear that the guidance can’t require pharmacies to dispense abortion drugs or violate their religious beliefs.”
“The ruling also indicated that the court will likely stop any future attempts by HHS to use this guidance to open a burdensome investigation against our client, Mayo Pharmacy in North Dakota, or pharmacies in Texas if they decline to dispense abortion drugs,” Bowman continued.
In July 2022, the month after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, HHS announced guidance for retail pharmacies to protect reproductive healthcare resources.
HHS cited Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act, which states that entities receiving federal financial assistance cannot exclude people from healthcare resources on the basis of sex.
“The action is the latest step in the HHS’ response to protect reproductive health care,” stated the department at the time. “HHS is committed to ensuring that people can access reproductive health care, free from discrimination.”
In response to the guidance, Texas and Mayo challenged HHS in court. The state argued the guidance interfered with its ban on most abortions while Mayo contended that the guidance violated its religious freedom.
Last September, in response to the court rejecting the Biden administration’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit, HHS released a revised guidance, clarifying that it “does not require pharmacies to fill prescriptions for medication for the purpose of abortion.”
