Citizen Petition from Attorney General of Massachusetts, et al.

FemInEM, a non-profit organization focused on reproductive healthcare in emergency departments, supports the petition to remove the Mifepristone Shared System REMS. They argue that mifepristone is safe and effective, and that emergency department visits following its use are often for non-urgent reasons or due to systemic healthcare barriers rather than drug safety issues.

A group of adolescent health researchers and clinicians argue that mifepristone is safe and effective for use by minors, citing clinical data and pharmacological evidence. They urge the FDA to ensure continued access to the medication without age-based restrictions, specifically refuting claims that it poses risks to the developing bodies of adolescents.

The Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund (DREDF) supports the petition to remove the Mifepristone REMS Program's in-person dispensing requirement. They argue that reinstating such a requirement would create illegal structural barriers for people with disabilities, who rely on telemedicine to overcome physical, financial, and logistical obstacles to healthcare.

Physicians for Reproductive Health, a physician-led national advocacy organization, supports the citizen petitions requesting the FDA eliminate restrictions on mifepristone access. They argue that mifepristone is safe and effective for medication abortion and miscarriage management, and that current restrictions—particularly those requiring in-person dispensing—unnecessarily create barriers to care and harm the patient-provider relationship.

The Boston University School of Law, through several of its legal programs, submits a supplemental comment supporting the removal of the Mifepristone Shared System Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS). They argue that restricting access to mifepristone increases intimate partner violence (IPV) and imposes significant social and economic burdens, particularly on marginalized and low-income communities.

Legal Voice, Family Violence Appellate Project, Sexual Violence Law Center, and the Washington State Coalition Against Domestic Violence are submitting a joint comment in support of the petition to remove or relax the FDA's Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) for mifepristone. They argue that the current restrictions create significant barriers to medication abortion, particularly for survivors of intimate partner violence (IPV) who face coercive control and need safe, private access to reproductive healthcare.

RHITES (Reproductive Health Initiative for Telehealth Equity & Solutions) supports the citizen petitions requesting that the FDA eliminate restrictions on mifepristone access under the Single Shared System REMS Program. They argue that telehealth for medication abortion is safe, effective, and provides critical benefits by reducing travel burdens, costs, and stigma for patients.

The Guttmacher Institute, a research and policy organization, submits this comment in support of citizen petitions regarding the FDA's regulation of mifepristone. They argue that mifepristone is safe and effective, and they criticize recent efforts to use "junk science" and misleading narratives to restrict access to medication abortion.

Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) supports the citizen petitions requesting that the FDA refrain from imposing additional restrictions on mifepristone. They argue that the drug is safe and effective based on extensive clinical evidence and that the current review is based on flawed, non-transparent research.

The Center for Telehealth and eHealth Law (CTeL) argues that telehealth is as effective as in-person care and is a vital tool for expanding healthcare access, particularly in underserved areas. They urge the FDA to refrain from placing restrictions on clinicians' ability to prescribe medication via telehealth, asserting that such restrictions would hinder care and be inconsistent with clinical evidence.