Challenge to Louisiana law that lists abortion pills as controlled dangerous substances can proceed

BATON ROUGE, La. (AP) — A legal challenge against a first-of-its-kind measure that recategorized two widely used abortion -inducing drugs as “controlled dangerous substances” in Louisiana can move forward, a judge ruled Thursday.

Baton Rouge-based Judge Jewel Welch denied the Louisiana Attorney General's request to dismiss a lawsuit filed last year by opponents of the law, who argue that the reclassification of the pills is unconstitutional and could cause needless and potentially life-threatening delays in treatment during medical emergencies.

Attorneys for defendants in the suit, including Attorney General Liz Murrill, argued that the lawsuit was premature. But attorneys for the plaintiffs, who include a doctor and pharmacist, said that since the law took effect in October, the measure has impacted how the plaintiffs handle and obtain the drugs on a “regular basis.”

A hearing date for the challenge has not yet been set.

Louisiana became the first state to heighten the classification of misoprostol and mifepristone, which have critical reproductive health care uses in addition to being used as a two-drug regimen to end pregnancies.

Passage of the measure by the GOP-dominated Legislature marked a new approach in conservative efforts to restrict access to abortion pills. In 2023, nearly two-thirds of all abortions in the country were medication abortions.

Now labeled as “Schedule IV drugs," the pills are in the same category as the opioid tramadol and other substances that can be addictive. Under the new classification, there are more stringent storage requirements and extra steps to obtain the drugs. Testifying against the legislation, doctors stressed the drugs would be stored in locked containers or elsewhere that may result in slower access during emergency situations where every second is vital.

In the legal challenge, which was filed in October, plaintiffs say the law may slow access to “lifesaving treatment for people experiencing obstetrical emergencies” and make it “significantly harder” for people to “obtain proven, effective remedies necessary for their treatment and care.” Plaintiffs are asking the judge for a permanent injunction, ultimately to halt the law.

The legislation spawned from anti-abortion groups and a Republican state senator's effort to prevent coerced abortion and make it more difficult for bad actors to obtain the drugs. The lawmaker pointed to the case of his sister in Texas who in 2022 was slipped seven misoprostol pills by her husband without her knowledge; she and the baby survived. Over the past 15 years, news outlets have reported on similar cases — none in Louisiana — but the issue does not appear widespread.

“The Louisiana Legislature spoke loud and clear last year that they stand for life and are against this controlled substance being prescribed without a prescription from a doctor,” Murrill said ahead of the hearing.

Prior to the reclassification, a prescription was still needed to obtain mifepristone and misoprostol in Louisiana. Before the change, medical personnel told The Associated Press that in hospitals the drugs — which are also used to treat miscarriages, induce labor and stop bleeding — were often stored in an OB-GYN unit in a “hemorrhage box” in the room, on the delivery table or in a nurse’s pocket, to ensure almost-immediate access in common emergency situations.

With the heightened classification also comes increased charges. If someone knowingly possesses mifepristone or misoprostol without a valid prescription for any purpose, they could be fined up to $5,000 and sent to jail for one to five years. The law carves out protections for pregnant women who obtain the drug without a prescription to take on their own.

Other plaintiffs in the lawsuit include the Birthmark Doula Collective, an organization of people trained to provide pregnancy care before, during and after birth; Nancy Davis, a woman who was denied an abortion in Louisiana and traveled out of state for one after learning her fetus would not survive; and a woman who said she was turned away from two emergency rooms instead of being treated for a miscarriage.

Louisiana currently has one of the strictest abortion bans in the country, which includes abortions via medication.

FILE - Mifepristone tablets are seen in a Planned Parenthood clinic, July 18, 2024, in Ames, Iowa. (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall, File)

President Donald Trump made a lot of tariff threats and trade promises this year. Many materialized into a barrage of new import taxes that overturned decades of U.S. economic policy — but others have yet to be fulfilled as 2025 comes to a close.

Some of Trump’s unrealized threats reflect a broader approach from a president with a track record of using sky-high levies to pressure other countries into new trade deals, one-up retaliatory measures or even punish political critics. At the same time, they arrived as growing list of tariffs did go into effect — from Trump's punishing new taxes on imported metals, to tit-for-tat levies with top U.S. trading partners like China — plunging consumers and businesses worldwide into uncertainty.

Here’s what Trump said when announcing some of his biggest (but still unrealized) tariff threats and promises this year, and where things stand today.

In his words:

What happened: The External Revenue Service has yet to be established as of the end of December. While administration officials continued to reiterate plans for launching the External Revenue Service during Trump's first months back in office, the entity does not yet exist.

In his words:

What happened: The EU's planned levy on American whiskey — which it unveiled as part of broader retaliation in response to Trump's new steel and aluminum tariffs — was postponed, with the latest delay reportedly running until at least February.

Trump's 200% tariff threat on European alcohol never materialized. But spirits were not included in the EU-U.S. trade deal struck over the summer, which set a 15% rate on most European imports.

In his words:

What happened: Despite Trump's repeated threats, the U.S. has yet to impose a 100% tariff on foreign films. After his initial May promise to initiate the process, the White House said no final decision had been made. Also still unclear is how the U.S. would tax a movie made overseas.

In his words:

What happened: The president did not sign an executive order imposing a 100% tariff on pharma products on Oct. 1 and, as of today, no levy has been put into place. But Trump previously suggested that steep levies on pharmaceutical drugs could arrive further down the road, telling CNBC in August that he would start by charging a “small tariff” and potentially raise the rate as high as 250%. Meanwhile, trade agreements with specific countries set their own rates or exemptions — with the U.K., for example, securing a 0% tariff on all British medicine exported to the U.S. for three years. The administration also announced deals with specific companies with promises of lower drug prices.

In his words:

What happened: A sweeping 100% on computer chips has yet to go into effect. When announcing his plans to impose the levy back in August, Trump was not specific about the timing. And other details have remained scarce.

In his words:

What happened: Details about how, when and if a tariff dividend will reach Americans are still scarce. Budget experts have said that the math doesn't add up. And Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent suggested that it might not mean checks from the government. Instead, Bessent told ABC in November, the rebate might take the form of tax cuts. White House National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett also told CBS News that it's up to Congress.

FILE - President Donald Trump speaks during an event to announce new tariffs in the Rose Garden at the White House, on April 2, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein, File)