An abortion pill is part of "women's healthcare" and its removal would have "devastating" consequences across the U.S., said a senior practicing physician and academic. 

Megan Ranney, deputy dean at Brown University School of Public Health, said that the use of mifepristone was "totally safe" and she was worried about what could happen if women in the U.S. were denied access to it. 

A federal judge in Texas overturned the two-decade-old approval of the abortion pill last Friday, the latest volley in a conservative battle against reproductive rights in the U.S..

READ MORE

Greek police investigate officer who opened fire

Village basketball tournament goes viral

One in every six adults experience infertility

If it stands, the ruling would reverse permission granted by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for a drug widely used to terminate unwanted pregnancies.

Ranney dismissed claims from critics that the drug was unsafe.

"It is totally safe. The combination of mifepristone plus misoprostol, the two medications which are used most commonly for medication abortion, are no more dangerous than having a miscarriage and in fact maybe slightly more safe than having a natural miscarriage," she told CGTN. "Certainly safer than the complications and risk of death from carrying a pregnancy to term. They are also safer not just from the physical side but from the emotional and mental side. 

"We have five decades of evidence that the best protection for a woman's mental health is having access to safe and legal abortion. Being forced to carry a pregnancy to term has tremendous downstream negative consequences not just for the pregnant person but for their family. The removal of this option would have devastating consequences for women nationwide"

Ranney said that 50 percent of abortions are carried out through medication in the U.S..

"As a woman, as a mother of a daughter but also as a physician I am tremendously concerned because - let's be clear - abortion is healthcare and reproductive rights are part of women's health," she added.

The FDA and the Justice Department both filed appeals against the decision on Friday, with President Joe Biden pledging to "fight this ruling."

And, in an illustration of how deep the fracture on abortion runs in U.S. society, a judge in Washington state moments later ruled in a separate case that access to the drug must be preserved in more than a dozen states.

The dueling legal opinions, along with the appeals, means the issue is almost certain to end up before the Supreme Court.

The conservative-dominated panel last year overturned the landmark Roe v. Wade ruling that had enshrined a woman's right to abortion for half a century.

The president of the powerful American Medical Association, Jack Resneck, said that allowing judges to interfere in "extensive, evidence-based, scientific review of ... well-established FDA processes is reckless and dangerous."

Planned Parenthood, one of the largest pro-abortion groups in the U.S., said the ruling by Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk was an assault on science.

And Allison M Whelan, assistant professor at Georgia State University College of Law has also said she is concerned about judges and politicians "undermining" the FDA.

She told CGTN: "My hope is that regardless of the administration they understand the broader implications of this ruling that it goes far beyond abortion with respect to undermining the FDA. 

"I'm not hopeful that a conservative administration, that is anti abortion, will continue to fight this. But it is really important that people remember the broader consequences, that this is not just about abortion and it opens up the litigation floodgate to challenge other medications."

Whelan said the current conflict is almost destined to reach the highest court in the country. 

She said: "It pretty much guarantees that this is going to end up before the Supreme Court because it has essentially resulted in what we call a circuit split. 

"The FDA has contradictory rulings, one saying you have to stay the approval of mifepristone and one saying you can't change anything. You have to keep the status quo and make sure that mifepristone remains available to pregnant persons throughout the U.S..

"So this clearly sets up a showdown that the Supreme Court is going to have to consider sooner rather than later."

Kacsmaryk's ruling came after a coalition of anti-abortion groups sued to freeze the national distribution of mifepristone. While he stayed the FDA's 23-year-old approval, he also halted "applicability of this opinion and order for seven days" to allow time for appeals.

Anti-abortion groups hailed the move.    

"Today's decision out of Texas is a win for the health and safety of women and girls," said Katie Glenn of Susan B Anthony Pro-Life America.

"The ruling reaffirms that pregnancy is not an illness and abortion is not healthcare. Finally the FDA is being held accountable for its egregious violation of its own rules."

Federal judges in the U.S. have a right to issue rulings that carry national legal force. Opinion polls show a majority of Americans favor access to abortion.

But the issue is an explosive one for those on the right and certain religious groups.

A number of Republican-dominated states have begun trying to restrict access to abortion, and have launched legal attempts to overturn what many believed was settled law.

The Supreme Court ruling last year was seen as a major victory for the movement.