> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.fdaweb.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# 18 State Attorneys General Support Mifepristone Ruling
- URL: https://www.fdaweb.com/18-state-attorneys-general-support-mifepristone-ruling/
- Published: 2024-10-21T12:00:00.000Z
- Updated: 2026-09-14T14:44:28.000Z
- Author: David McFarland
- Tags: Drugs, #legacy-id-D5158022

A coalition of 18 attorneys general have [filed an amicus brief in support](https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/court-filings/24-1576%5Famicus-brief-bryant-v-stein.pdf?ref=fdaweb.com) of a district court decision finding that North Carolina “cannot impose unnecessary and burdensome restrictions” to access the abortion drug mifepristone that were rejected by FDA.

The attorneys general filed the Fourth Circuit brief in *Bryant v. Stein*, arguing that “mifepristone has been safely and widely used for decades, and barriers to accessing mifepristone can drive up medical risks for patients,” according to NY attorney general **Letitia James** said in a [release](https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/2024/attorney-general-james-urges-federal-court-reverse-restrictions-access-abortion?ref=fdaweb.com).

“Since 2016, the FDA has removed certain restrictions on mifepristone access, such as the requirement to obtain mifepristone in person and from a physician, on the grounds that these restrictions neither improved patient safety nor adequately minimized burdens on the health care system,” James said. “In 2023, North Carolina imposed various restrictions on the use and distribution of mifepristone, including many of the restrictions that were expressly removed by the FDA.”

The plaintiff is an abortion provider in North Carolina who challenged state restrictions as being preempted by federal law. A district court held that a state law that adds restrictions removed by FDA under the agency’s statutory authority to create a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy would be preempted, according to James. “The coalition’s amicus brief defends the district court’s decision as striking the proper balance between state authority and FDA regulation,” she said.