by Corinne Murdock | May 5, 2023 | News
By Corinne Murdock |
Attorney General Kris Mayes has issued another challenge to keep accessibility of the controversial abortion drug mifepristone.
In a press release issued Tuesday, Mayes announced that she’d joined an amicus brief against the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas ruling blocking the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of mifepristone. Mayes accused Texas federal judge Matthew Kacsmaryk of being an “extremist” opposing medical consensus.
“We cannot allow anti-abortion activists and an extremist judge to undo over two decades of medical consensus. Mifepristone is safe and effective and has been used by millions of Americans over the past two decades,” said Mayes.
READ MAYES’ AMICUS BRIEF HERE
The efficacy and safety of mifepristone remains dubious. In the ruling challenged by Mayes, Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. FDA, Kacsmaryk noted the hundreds of known cases of infections and deaths arising from the drug’s usage. Kacsmaryk cited a 2006 hearing and report by the U.S. House Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human Resources, which noted at least 8 women’s deaths, 9 life-threatening illnesses, 232 hospitalizations, 116 blood transfusions, and 88 cases of infection; overall, over 950 adverse event cases from the drug out of 575,000 prescriptions.
Kacsmaryk also noted that the FDA took nearly 14 years to reject a petition from multiple medical professional coalitions challenging their approval of the drug. The judge further noted that, on the same day of their rejection of the petition, the FDA expanded allowed usage for the abortion drug, changed the dosage, reduced the number of required in-person office visits, allowed non-doctors to prescribe and administer the drug, and eliminated the requirement for prescribers to report non-fatal adverse events from the drug.
In the ruling, Kacsmaryk shared that there are likely far more than the known 4,200 adverse events from chemical abortion drugs due to the FDA’s rule change eliminating non-fatal adverse reporting requirements and emergency rooms miscoding over 60 percent of women’s emergency room visits for adverse abortion drug reactions as miscarriages.
What’s more, Kacsmaryk rejected the main justification for the FDA’s approval of the abortion drug: reclassifying pregnancy as a “serious or life-threatening illness” and therefore justifying mifepristone as a “meaningful therapeutic benefit.”
“Pregnancy is a normal physiological state most women experience one or more times during their childbearing years — a natural process essential to perpetuating life,” stated Kacsmaryk. “Nothing in the [FDA] Final Rule supports the interpretation that pregnancy is a serious or life-threatening illness.”
Kacsmaryk also pointed out that the FDA had neglected to apply its logic to expedited treatments for other, less politicized ailments.
“[C]ategorizing complications or negative psychological experiences arising from pregnancy as ‘illnesses’ is materially different than classifying pregnancy itself as a serious or life-threatening illness,” stated Kascmaryk. “Tellingly, [the] FDA never explains how or why a ‘condition’ would not qualify as a ‘serious or life-threatening illness.’ Suppose that a woman experiences depression because of lower back pain that inhibits her mobility. Under FDA’s reading, a new drug used to treat lower back pain — which can cause depression, just like unplanned pregnancy — could obtain accelerated approval [per the FDA’s rationale].”
The FDA approval took place during the Clinton administration. Similar to Kacsmaryk, the Governmental Accountability Office (GAO) noted in 2008 that medical professionals critical of the abortion drug’s approval questioned the reclassification of the abortion drug as warranted.
“Critics have argued that unwanted pregnancy should not be considered a serious or life-threatening illness.”
The Texas federal court ruling doesn’t impact Arizona at present; it may later on, based on pending future rulings in higher courts.
SCOTUS agreed to an application for a stay by the FDA of the Texas district court ruling, filed early last month. SCOTUS issued the stay late last month, allowing mifepristone to be made widely available while the appeals process plays out in the U.S. District Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Joining Mayes in the amicus brief are the attorneys general of California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawai’i, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
by Corinne Murdock | Apr 17, 2023 | News
By Corinne Murdock |
“We have more votes than Kris Mayes. It’s up to the courts to decide to count them.” – Abe Hamadeh
Recent analysis of uncounted provisional ballots in November’s attorney general race make a compelling case that Abe Hamadeh received more legal votes than Kris Mayes.
The 2022 faceoff between Hamadeh and Mayes serves as one of the closest races in Arizona’s history. It’s on par with one other historically significant race that was ultimately overturned, even after both the Maricopa County Superior Court and a Democratic Secretary of State had declared a winner: the 1916 gubernatorial election.
However, the year-long contention of that election had to do with the design of the ballots confusing voters on their vote. This time around, just over 100 years later, the issue concerned voters whose votes were denied to them due to government missteps and failures with election administration.
Last Tuesday, the Mohave County Superior Court granted Hamadeh oral arguments in his motion for a new trial challenging the outcome of his election based on hundreds of allegedly disenfranchised voters. That will occur in about a month, on May 16. Hamadeh shared that they have over 250 affidavits from allegedly disenfranchised voters at present. The vote margin difference is 280.
According to all counties’ data, there are roughly 8,000 provisional ballots outstanding. Hamadeh led on day-of voters statewide, winning an average of 70 percent of the votes. Provisional ballots may heavily favor him, due to the additional fact that day-of votes were generally 2 to 1 Republican.
“All data points suggest that it favors Republicans,” said Hamadeh.
It appears that, due to the mass tabulator failures, there were less voters but more provisional ballots cast this past election year. Rejection rates of these provisional ballots increased sharply across several counties: Santa Cruz County’s rejections increased from one out of the 117 provisional ballots cast to 83 out of the 139 provisional ballots cast. Pima County’s rejection rate doubled.
Despite Pinal County having a comparable number of provisional ballots cast in 2020 and 2022, their rejection rate increased from 59 to 63 percent.
Yavapai County more than doubled its rejection of provisional ballots this past election than in 2020 based on non-registration, despite having a significant decline in voter turnout (over 87 percent versus just over 75 percent).
Further data will be published in full as court proceedings continue. Hamadeh shared that his legal team is awaiting some data from several counties, which he said would bolster their case.
“As more data comes in, it’s getting worse for the government and looking better for us,” said Hamadeh.
Another development that could impact Hamadeh’s case is the divorce between Democrats’ top election lawyer, Marc Elias, and the Democratic National Committee (DNC).
Elias is engaged in an ongoing federal lawsuit fighting for the voting rights of those voters whose registration was canceled. Elias is fighting for all provisional ballots to be counted — an outcome that would be favorable for Hamadeh’s case, when it was originally intended to be favorable to Democratic interests.
Hamadeh’s legal and analytics teams estimate that over 1,000 voters had their voter registration erroneously canceled due to government system issues. That’s separate from the 8,000 provisional ballots outstanding.
Hamadeh’s team also discovered 750 high-propensity voters whose registrations were wrongly canceled. Of that number, only 176 showed up on Election Day.
“It’s really a screwed up situation,” said Hamadeh. “If you can imagine, the disenfranchisement is even bigger than what we’re arguing.”
Bureaucratic mismanagement resulting in voter registration failures is nothing new, especially for Maricopa County. In 2020, thousands of voters were nearly disenfranchised by intergovernmental miscommunication.
Hamadeh dismissed the argument from some outlets that high-propensity voters should’ve taken more steps to ensure they were registered, saying that doesn’t excuse the government’s failure.
“If you’re on PEVL [Permanent Early Voting List] and you expect your ballot to come but it doesn’t, you’re disenfranchised,” said Hamadeh.
Hamadeh referenced one case he called “egregious,” where a father paying his college daughter’s vehicle registration unknowingly had his registration transferred to a different county — all because his daughter was going to college in a different county.
“Without any notice by the way, he never got any notice. And we know he never intended to go to Coconino because he doesn’t have a house there or anything,” said Hamadeh.
There was also the case of Howard, a visually-impaired disabled veteran whose voter registration was canceled through bureaucratic error, unbeknownst to him, and left him without his voting power in this last election. Hamadeh insisted that Democrats’ refusal to see Howard as the victim in this case was hypocritical.
“The media and Democrats are trying to say this is voter error. But in every single election incident, just two years ago, they were arguing against these voter registration cancellations,” said Hamadeh.
Then there’s the 269 voters who showed up on election day with their mail-in ballot and checked in — but never had their vote counted. Yet, on the county’s end, those check-ins reflect votes cast. Of those 269 who dropped off mail-in ballots that weren’t counted, 149 were Republicans, 53 were Democrats, and 67 were “other.” Hamadeh reported that many of those voters told his team that their votes weren’t counted.
With a 280 vote margin between Mayes and Hamadeh, any of these contested provisional or mail-in ballots may result in the first race overturned in nearly a century.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
by Daniel Stefanski | Apr 17, 2023 | News
By Daniel Stefanski |
Arizona has been one of the nation’s most-ardent pro-life states, but its new Democrat Attorney General is seeking to quickly reverse that standing as she reacts to recent cases in the federal court system.
Last Friday, United States District Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk, who was appointed by former President Donald Trump, issued an order in Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, et al. v U.S. Food and Drug Administration, granting a motion to stay “the effective date of the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) September 28, 2000 Approval of mifepristone and all subsequent challenged actions related to that approval – i.e., the 2016 Changes, the 2019 Generic Approval, and the 2021 Actions.”
Yet the same day, United States District Judge Thomas O. Rice, who was appointed by former President Barack Obama, issued an order in State of Washington, et al. v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, et al., preliminarily enjoining the FDA and other defendants from “altering the status quo and rights as it relates to the availability of Mifepristone under the current operative January 2023 Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy under 21 U.S.C. 355-1 in Plaintiff States.”
The plaintiffs in Judge Rice’s order were Washington, Oregon, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Rhode Island, Vermont, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, and the District of Columbia.
Judge Kacsmaryk stayed his own order for seven days “to allow the federal government time to seek emergency relief from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.” Judge Rice’s order went into effect immediately for the plaintiff states.
Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes previously joined the Washington case in February, stating that the lawsuit “asserts that the FDA exceeded its authority by continuing its unnecessary and extremely burdensome restrictions on mifepristone,” and it “asks the court to find the FDA’s REMS (Risk Evaluation & Mitigation Strategies) restrictions unlawful and to bar the federal agency from enforcing or applying them to mifepristone.”
After Friday’s two judicial orders, Mayes assured her fellow Arizonans “that legal access to the drug (mifepristone) remains available for providers and patients in this state.” She promised that her office would join other states in filing an amicus brief to oppose Judge Kacsmaryk’s ruling, which came Monday. The court filing from several attorneys general across the country urged the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit “to stay pending appeal the district court’s ruling.” Mayes said that “Judge Kacsmaryk’s outrageous and appalling ruling, if allowed to stand, would upend decades of scientific research and established legal principles.”
A three-judge panel quickly considered the appeal and decided that “the statute of limitations bars plaintiffs’ challenges to the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of mifepristone in 2000.” However, the judges noted that the plaintiffs’ arguments brought before the district court in “2016 and subsequent years” were timely. The FDA’s changes from 2016-on were as follows: “increased gestational age to 70 days (from 50 days); reduced required in-person office visits to one (from three), allowed non-doctors to prescribe and administer mifepristone; and eliminated reporting of non-fatal adverse events.” In 2021, the FDA also announced “’enforcement discretion’ to allow mifepristone to be dispensed through the mail during COVID-19.”
After the decision from the Appeals Court panel, Kristen Waggoner, the CEO and President for Alliance Defending Freedom, tweeted, “Last night’s Fifth Circuit decision is a step forward for the rule of law. Critical safeguards removed by the @US_FDA will be restored and abortion by mail will end. The FDA put politics over science when it unlawfully approved dangerous chemical abortion drugs. It has evaded legal responsibility for years and has jeopardized the health of women and girls. While there is still work to do to hold the FDA accountable for its lawlessness, girls and women are safer today.”
On Thursday, Attorney General Mayes “provided a summary of the legal status of mifepristone in Arizona” – as it stood at the moment. Mayes admitted that “this is a fast-moving situation, and we are likely to see further court orders in the coming days and weeks.” She vowed to “use every tool at our disposal to fight back against rulings from extremist judges seeking to interfere with the rights of individuals to make their own personal medical decisions.” Her release broadcasted that “under Arizona law, patients in other states who need reproductive care can still travel to Arizona to receive care here.”
The case is expected to be expedited to the U.S. Supreme Court based on the conflicting rulings from the District Courts in Texas and Washington, and the updated decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Corinne Murdock | Apr 5, 2023 | News
By Corinne Murdock |
Attorney General Kris Mayes is pushing to soften policy on blood donations from sexually active, gay men. Mayes joined 22 other states, led by California Attorney General Rob Bonta, in supporting the policy change proposed by the Biden administration, which would reject potential donors who had sex with a new partner or more than one partner within the prior three months.
Current policy prohibits gay or bisexual men from donating blood if they’ve been sexually active within the prior three months. In a press release, Mayes called this protective measure “outdated.”
“Discriminatory blood donation policies not only stigmatize the LGBTQ community, and gay and bisexual men in particular, but also endanger the lives of patients in need,” said Mayes. “It’s long past time to abandon outdated practices and embrace a risk-based approach that allows all eligible donors to contribute to the blood supply. If implemented, the new guidance proposed by the Biden administration will undoubtedly save lives.”
Initially, the proposed policy change concerned offsetting the donor blood shortage resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic.
The FDA indefinitely rejected blood donations from sexually active gay or bisexual men beginning in the 1980s with the AIDS outbreak, prohibiting any man who’d engaged in sodomy even once. It wasn’t until 2015 that the FDA softened this policy to allow blood donations from sexually active gay or bisexual men, so long as that donor claimed to not have been sexually active within the prior 12 months.
The FDA again revised its guidance to reduce the 12-month waiting period to three months.
In their letter to the Biden administration, Mayes and the 22 states argued that modern donor blood testing can find the presence of HIV within anywhere from 10 days to three months of transmission. They cited other countries with similar nondiscriminatory donation policies.
Several of the countries listed, including Italy and Mexico, have noted a higher-than-desirable prevalence of HIV-positive donors over the years, as well as concerns that screening policies don’t reach far enough.
The attorneys general also noted that men who claim to be in a monogamous, homosexual relationship suffered the greatest burden under current policy. Based on current data, monogamy is less commonly practiced by gay or bisexual men.
HIV and AIDS aren’t the only sexually-transmitted diseases (STDs) that primarily result from sodomy. Last year, a global monkeypox outbreak occurred after an infected British man engaged in sexual activity while attending two raves in Belgium and Spain. The man caught monkeypox in Africa, where the disease is mainly endemic in animals.
The other states joining Arizona in supporting the Biden administration’s proposed policy change include California, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawai’i, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
by Corinne Murdock | Mar 14, 2023 | News
By Corinne Murdock |
Two GOP lawmakers will defend the state’s ban on abortions due to fetal genetic abnormalities, since Attorney General Kris Mayes refuses.
House Speaker Ben Toma (R-LD27) and Senate President Warren Petersen (R-LD14) were granted permission to defend the law by U.S. District Court Judge Douglas Rayes last Thursday. Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), a Scottsdale-based Christian legal advocacy group, is representing Toma and Petersen in the case, Isaacson v. Mayes.
Rayes determined that Toma and Petersen were qualified to intervene because they had significant protectable interest in the case. The pair requested to intervene in February, following Mayes informing the court that she no longer wished to represent the state in this case. Mayes told multiple news outlets just days into her administration that she wouldn’t defend or uphold the state’s existing abortion laws.
“Arizona has made a policy decision to vest in its legislative leaders an interest in defending the constitutionality of the legislature’s enactments,” stated Rayes. “If [Toma and Petersen] are not permitted to intervene, the challenged laws will go undefended, which ‘risk[s] turning a deaf ear to the voices the State has deemed crucial to understanding the full range of its interests.’”
Throughout her campaign and in her first few months as attorney general, Mayes characterized the contested abortion ban as “unconstitutional” and in violation of Arizona’s privacy clause, promised to not prosecute abortionists in violation of law, and vowed to use her authority to prevent county attorneys from enforcing abortion restrictions and bans.
“Intervention is even more appropriate here, where the Attorney General’s interests are directly contrary to those of the proposed intervenor,” stated ADF’s petition.
As AZ Free News reported last week, Mayes revealed that her office has even been encouraging pharmacies to give out abortion pills.
A.R.S. § 12-1841 allows legislative leaders to intervene in cases challenging the constitutionality of state statutes. Last year, the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) upheld the legality of state laws like Arizona’s.
Abortionists Paul Isaacson and Eric Ruess; the National Council of Jewish Women, Arizona section; Arizona National Organization for Women; and Arizona Medical Association sued the state over the abortion ban in August 2021. The ban, codified through SB1457, prevents a woman from terminating her pregnancy due to the presence of any fetal genetic abnormalities, like Down Syndrome.
SB1457 argued that the state had three compelling interests in outlawing selective abortions: protecting the disability community from discriminatory abortions; protecting citizens from coercive medical practices encouraging selective abortions based on genetic abnormalities; and protecting the integrity and ethics of the medical profession by preventing doctors from becoming witting participants in genetic-abnormality-selective abortion.
READ THE ABORTION BAN HERE
Last July, the court ruled that the law’s recognition of the personhood of unborn children was unconstitutionally vague and in conflict with other state laws.
The state legislature is working on passing additional abortion regulations and restrictions. SB1600 from State Sen. Janae Shamp (R-LD29) provides protections to infants born alive from a botched abortion. According to the Arizona Department of Health’s (AZDHS) latest data, at least nine babies were born alive following a botched abortion procedure in 2021. The Senate passed Shamp’s bill along party lines last month.
SB1146 from State Sen. Jake Hoffman (R-LD15) would require the State Board of Investment to identify companies that donate to or invest in organizations that promote, facilitate, or advocate for abortions for minors or for the inclusion of or referral of K-12 students to sexually explicit material. The Senate passed the bill earlier this month, also along party lines.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.