Gov. Jared Polis (D-CO) signed the “Safe Access to Protected Health Care” package of legislation into law Friday, and within hours a legal challenge was filed by The Becket Fund, a Washington, D.C.-based, non-profit law firm, on behalf of Bella Health and Wellness (Bella), a Catholic healthcare provider, against SB23-190, which targets the marketing practices of anti-abortion centers and their use of an unproven pill to reverse an abortion.
The lawsuit, which names Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser and District Attorneys John Kellner, Michael Dougherty, Beth McCann, and members of the Colorado Medical Board as defendants, argues that the law is a violation of Bella Health’s First Amendment rights.
“Patients across Colorado deserve access to honest, factual medical information so they can make informed decisions about their own reproductive health care,” said Rep. Karen McCormick (D-Longmont), one of the bill’s sponsors, in a news release. “Our law protects patients by putting an end to the deceptive advertising practices used by some anti-abortion centers to lure patients in under the guise that they offer the full range of reproductive health care when they do not. Deceptive practices put Coloradans at risk, limit their access to care and spread misinformation about the so-called ‘medication abortion reversal’ which is medically unethical and unproven.”
Abortion pill reversal is commonly advertised at anti-abortion centers. The abortion pill reversal is essentially doses of progesterone to counteract the effects of mifepristone. During a medication abortion, mifepristone is administered to block progesterone, stopping the development of the fetus. Misoprostol, the second part of a medication abortion, is then administered to cause the uterus to expel the fetus.
Democrats and abortion advocates argue that “abortion pill reversal” is not supported by medical science. According to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, “A 2012 case series reported on six women who took mifepristone and were then administered varying progesterone doses. Four continued their pregnancies. This is not scientific evidence that progesterone resulted in the continuation of those pregnancies. This study was not supervised by an institutional review board (IRB) or an ethical review committee, required to protect human research subjects, raising serious questions regarding the ethics and scientific validity of the results. Case series with no control groups are among the weakest forms of medical evidence. Subsequent case series used to support use of medication abortion reversal have had similar limitations, including no ethics approval, no control group, under-reporting of data, and no reported safety outcomes. A 2020 study intending to evaluate medication abortion reversal in a controlled, IRB-approved setting was ended early due to safety concerns among the participants.”
The safety concerns in the 2020 study involved three women who experienced vaginal hemorrhaging and needed to be taken to the emergency room. One woman needed a blood transfusion.
“We don’t have any evidence that disproves the possibility that abortion reversal exists,” said Mitchell Creinin, the study’s lead researcher, to Vice in 2019. “But I do have evidence that not completing the regimen as it’s designed is dangerous.”
Bella’s lawsuit notes that Creinin is a “paid consultant of Danco Laboratories, the distributor of mifepristone in the United States,” and argues that the use of progesterone to counteract mifepristone is an appropriate off-label use, noting that “In November 2021, the UK’s National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) published new guidelines, based on review of recent studies (including the PRISM study), recommending progesterone therapy for women with early pregnancy bleeding and at least one previous miscarriage.”
The lawsuit also argues that “Bella has treated dozens of abortion pill reversal patients who successfully maintained their pregnancies.”
Bella’s lawsuit also claims legislators demonstrated a clear bias against faith-based organizations. “The debate surrounding SB 23-190 shows that it targets religious organizations in Colorado that offer alternatives to abortion,” reads the lawsuit, which goes on to cite comments from Sen. Janice Marchman (D-Loveland), Sen. Faith Winter (D-Denver), Rep. Elisabeth Epps (D-Denver), Rep. Stephanie Vigil (D-CO Springs), and McCormick mentioning religion or religious institutions.
The lawsuit claims, “These and other accusations caused Sen. James Smallwood, Jr. [R-Parker] to describe the bill as ‘as close to pure vitriolic dribble that I’ve ever seen’ in seven years as a legislator, and to comment that ‘the sheer lack of even thinly veiled neutrality is just appalling.’”
Bella argues that SB23-190 is depriving abortion patients of choice. “Every day that Bella is forced to remain silent about abortion pill reversal, women in Colorado are deprived of information about highly qualified and local doctors and nurses who would help them if they have willingly or unwillingly taken mifepristone,” they claim in the lawsuit. “Absent an injunction, these women may miss the critical window needed to effectuate their choice to continue their pregnancies, and Bella will miss the opportunity to help them.”
Abortion advocates say SB23-190, and the “Safe Access to Protected Health Care” package of legislation, is needed to protect access to reproductive health care. “For years, we’ve heard from young people across the state about the harm anti-abortion centers cause — especially students on campuses near anti-abortion centers — through the Brazen Project. There is a clear pattern of anti-abortion centers deceiving young people to shame and mislead them away from accessing essential health care during their most vulnerable time. We’re proud of the work we’ve done with our community members and COLOR to pass SB23-190 Deceptive Trade Practice Pregnancy-related Service to make sure every person in and coming to Colorado for care receives unbiased and accurate medical information,” said Arianna Morales, Policy Manager at New Era Colorado, in a news release. “Each bill in the Safe Access to Protected Health Care Package is an essential pillar in building Colorado’s capabilities as a reproductive care safe haven. With the attacks on access to abortion care crossing state lines, the package of bills is needed more than ever. Young people turn out to protect and expand abortion access; we showed up at the legislature this year, and we’ll keep advocating until reproductive care is truly accessible and affordable for all people in Colorado.”
“We opened Bella because of our belief that life is a precious gift from God, worthy of protection at all stages,” said Dede Chism, cofounder and CEO at Bella Health and Wellness, to the Denver Catholic newsletter. “When a woman seeks our help to reverse the effects of the abortion pill, we have a religious obligation to offer every available option for her and her child.”
Update 4/17/23: First reported by the Colorado Sun, Daniel Domenico, a Trump-appointed federal judge for the District of Colorado, granted a temporary restraining order and injunction Saturday, temporarily preventing the enforcement of SB23-190 against Bella Health and Wellness. A preliminary injunction hearing has been set for April 24.
Photo courtesy Colorado Senate Dems.
