Page:Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (N.D. Texas 2023).pdf/29

 life.” See Bours, 229 F. at 964; ECF No. 28-1 at 206. And twenty-two states filed an amicus brief arguing FDA’s decision to permit mail-in chemical abortion harms the public interest by undermining states’ ability to enforce laws regulating abortion. ECF No. 100 at 17.
 * b. Individual Injustice and Irreparable Injury

Second, the agency’s actions are “likely to result in individual injustice” or cause “irreparable injury.” Myron, 670 F.2d at 52; Dawson, 504 F.3d at 606. Plaintiffs allege “many intense side effects” and “significant complications requiring medical attention” resulting from Defendants’ actions. ECF No. 7 at 13. Many women also experience intense psychological trauma and post-traumatic stress from excessive bleeding and from seeing the remains of their aborted children. See ECF No. 96 at 25–29; Pauline Slade et al., Termination of pregnancy: Patient’s perception of care, Vol. 27, No. 2, 72–77 (2001) (“Seeing the foetus, in general, appears to be a difficult aspect of the medical termination process which can be distressing, bring home the reality of the event and may influence later emotional adaptation.”). Parenthetically, said “individual justice” and “irreparable injury” analysis also arguably applies to the unborn humans extinguished by mifepristone — especially in