- Try a Digital Subscription campaign: nyt2013_bar1_ros_digi_3JHWX -- 217590, creative: bar1_ros_hp_digi_3JHWX -- 339586, page: www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/health/appeals-court-lifts-limit-on-emergency-contraceptive.html, targetedPage: www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/health, position: Bar1
- Log In
- Register Now
- Help

- Home Page
- Today's Paper
- Video
- Most Popular

Edition: U.S. / Global
Search All NYTimes.com

## Health

Advertise on NYTimes.com

# Judge Orders All Restrictions Lifted on Some ‘Morning-After’ Pills

<NYT_BYLINE >

###### By PAM BELLUCK and MICHAEL D. SHEAR

</NYT_BYLINE>

###### Published: June 5, 2013

<NYT_TEXT > <NYT_CORRECTION_TOP> </NYT_CORRECTION_TOP>

A federal appeals court in New York on Wednesday ordered that some types of emergency contraceptives be made available for now to women of all ages without a prescription, adding another layer of confusion to a complex and intensely political fight over the drug’s availability.

In a brief ruling, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ordered that the federal government lift all age and sales restrictions for two-pill versions of emergency contraceptives until the court finally rules on an appeal by the federal government, which is trying to maintain limits on the drug’s over-the-counter availability.

Two-pill versions of the drug, and all but one brand of the one-pill version, are now available without a prescription only to women 17 and older. In April, a federal district judge ruled that all versions of the so-called morning-after contraceptive be made available over-the-counter to all ages. The Obama administration appealed that ruling and asked that the judge’s order be postponed until the appeals court renders a final judgment. All briefs in the case are due Aug. 14.

The Food and Drug Administration last month ruled that Plan-B One-Step, but not other one-pill brands, be made available without a prescription for girls and women ages 15 and older. Purchasers are still required to show identification to verify their age. The appeals court’s interim ruling Wednesday does not change that brand’s availability.

Officials with the F.D.A., the Health and Human Services department and the Justice Department said they were reviewing Wednesday’s decision.

Both the one-pill and two-pill emergency contraceptives involve the same ingredient, the hormone levonorgestrel. But the distinction between the two versions has been invoked primarily for legal or technical reasons.

The appeals court on Wednesday did not explain why it permitted two-pill versions to be sold over-the-counter, but not any one-pill versions, which have been overtaking the United States market. However, the original lawsuit, filed nearly a decade ago, referred to two-pill versions because there were no one-pill versions at the time. Legal experts said the appeals court might have decided Wednesday that the government had less of a chance of succeeding in its appeal regarding two-pill versions.

The issue of emergency contraception is fraught with political sensitivities for the Obama administration. Conservative groups object to the drug itself, arguing that it may encourage young people to have unprotected sex. Some anti-abortion groups also contend that the drug is tantamount to an abortion pill, despite strong scientific evidence that the pill only prevents fertilization and does not act after an egg is fertilized.

Scientists have long argued against the need for any restrictions on the pill’s sale, saying that studies show it is safer than many common over-the-counter drugs, including acetaminophen. And women’s rights groups have advocated for the drug as a safe option for women in an emergency.

Supporters of lifting all restrictions note that most people who use the drug are not adolescents, but that having any age limits at all requires pharmacies to make access to the pills more difficult for everyone, since government-issued picture identification is needed, and some people do not have such identification or may not have it readily available.

In December 2011, as President Obama was running for re-election, his secretary of health and human services, Kathleen Sebelius, took the unprecedented step of overruling an F.D.A. plan to lift all age restrictions. Ms. Sebelius said she was concerned that there were not enough studies to prove that the drug was safe for girls as young as 11. Mr. Obama supported her decision, saying that as a father of young girls, the idea of making the drug available to them without a prescription made him uncomfortable.

The administration sought to strike a balance in May, supporting a change that made Plan B One-Step available to girl ages 15 and older without a prescription, and directed drugstores to sell that pill openly, rather than locking it up behind a counter.

The F.D.A. said it had restricted its decision to Plan B One-Step because the manufacturer, Teva Pharmaceuticals, filed an amended application to lower the age of availability to 15. The F.D.A. also said that more studies would be required to show that girls under age 17 could understand how to take two pills instead of just one.

The next day, the government appealed the broader federal court order, issued in April by Judge Edward R. Korman of Federal District Court for the Eastern District of New York, who accused the government of placing politics ahead of science. The judge issued a similarly scathing response to the government’s appeal, singling out what he called the “bad-faith, politically motivated decision of Secretary Sebelius, who lacks any medical or scientific expertise.”

<NYT_AUTHOR_ID>

Katie Thomas contributed reporting.

</NYT_AUTHOR_ID><NYT_CORRECTION_BOTTOM>
</NYT_CORRECTION_BOTTOM><NYT_UPDATE_BOTTOM> </NYT_UPDATE_BOTTOM> </NYT_TEXT>

###### A version of this article appeared in print on June 6, 2013, on page A 14 of the New York edition with the headline: Judge Orders All Restrictions Lifted on Some ‘Morning-After’ Pills.

Try unlimited access to NYTimes.com for just 99¢. SEE OPTIONS »

##### Get Free E-mail Alerts on These Topics

Birth Control and Family Planning | Plan B (Contraceptive)
Drugs (Pharmaceuticals) | Decisions and Verdicts

### Well

##### ‘Tummy Time’ May Not Be Needed

June 6, 2013

##### Uncertainty Is Hard for Doctors

June 6, 2013

##### Living With Cancer: Look Good, Feel Better

June 6, 2013

##### Think Like a Doctor: A Cough That Won’t Quit

June 6, 2013

##### This Is Your Brain on Coffee

June 6, 2013

Advertise on NYTimes.com

### Health & Fitness Tools

BMI Calculator
What’s your score? »

## Charting the Impact of Everyday Sexism Across the World

Special Report: The Female Factor »

- Ukraine's Feminist Shock Troops
- Progress, but Still a Long Way to Go, for Women in Norway

campaign: nyt2013_300x79_ros_3JHWL_var_intGGB -- 211201, creative: 300x79_3JHWL_var_intGGB -- 331428, page: www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/health/appeals-court-lifts-limit-on-emergency-contraceptive.html, targetedPage: www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/health, position: Middle5

#### Inside NYTimes.com

###### Books »

###### Riding Waves of Thrills, Chills and Carats

###### N.Y. / Region »

###### Prospect-Lefferts Gardens Unruffled by Shootings

###### Sports »

###### A Flashy Trainer Is Enjoying a Renaissance

###### Sunday Review »

###### Can You Guess the Mystery Object?

###### Art & Design »

###### ‘Hopper Drawing,’ at the Whitney Museum

###### Opinion »

### Disunion: Mapping Appalachia

Lincoln saw Appalachia as a key to winning the war. But first, he had to get a good map.

###### Theater »

###### Curtain’s Up on a Real Race at the Tonys

###### Travel »

###### Just Tap Here: Technology and Travel

###### Music »

###### 88 Spots to Tickle Keys and Your Fancy

###### Opinion »

### Should the Justices Let Genes Be Patented?

Or, Room for Debate asks, would that create too many restrictions for patients, doctors and researchers?

###### Business »

###### An Experimental Drug’s Bitter End

###### Opinion »

###### Op-Ed: King of My Castle? Yeah, Right