Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine

Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine Falsely Claims That Sex And Gender Are The Same, Fueling Transphobia And Stigmatizing Gender-Affirming Health Care. “Our Values … Sanctity of the body asserting no difference between biological sex and gender except in the case of rare, diagnosable disorders of sexual development.” [Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, accessed 3/28/23]

Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine Signed A Letter Asking The Department Of Health And Human Services To Stop Its Proposed Non-Discrimination Rule, Which Would Interpret Section 1557 Of The Affordable Care Act To Define Sex Discrimination As Inclusive Of Sexual Orientation And Gender Identity, As Well As Strengthen Non-Discrimination Protections For Pregnant People. [Ethics and Public Policy Center, 3/11/22]

• The Letter Cites Medical Myths About Gender-Affirming Care. “[T]hese policies would be devastating for people—most especially children—struggling with gender identity issues. It would require dangerous and harmful treatments on physically healthy individuals that in many cases will lead to permanent sterility without off-setting mental health benefits. Under cover of ‘anti-discrimination’ the proposal would upend centuries of scientific understanding of what it means to be a man or a woman with respect to medicine and biology. Further, religious health care professionals and entities, as well as those who have scientific and medical objections to transition treatments, would be required to perform them.” [Ethics and Public Policy Center, 3/11/22]

As Opponents Of Reproductive Freedom And Medical Consensus, Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine Believes That Abortion Is Not Health Care. “Abortion is not healthcare. As physicians and other healthcare professionals, we know that when we care for pregnant women, we are caring for two distinct patients. … The science is clear – at the moment of fertilization, a new distinct, living and whole human being comes into existence.” [Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, 11/1/2021]

• Several Of Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine’s Partnering Organizations Called For Abortion Care To Be Suspended At The Start Of The COVID-19 Pandemic, Against The Expertise Of The American College Of Obstetricians And Gynecologists. “As representatives of over 30,000 physicians who practice according to the Hippocratic Oath, the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG), the American College of Pediatricians, Christian Medical & Dental Associations, the Catholic Medical Association, and the Association of American Physicians & Surgeons decry the call to continue elective abortion during the COVID-19 pandemic made by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and others which falsely characterize elective abortion as essential healthcare. … ACOG spinning ‘elective’ abortion into ‘essential’ health care is more of the same. Continuing to perform elective abortions during a pandemic is medically irresponsible. Elective abortion is neither ‘essential’ nor ‘urgent,’ but it does consume critical resources such as masks, gloves, and other personal protective equipment, and unnecessarily exposes patients and physicians to pathogens.” [AAPLOG, accessed 3/28/23]

Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine Spreads Medical Disinformation Which Falsely Links Accessing Abortion Care To Adverse Health Outcomes. “The evidence is clear that abortions increase the risk of preterm delivery in future pregnancies, increase a woman’s risk of mental health disorders and suicide and increase her risk of breast cancer if she has not yet had a full-term pregnancy. These risks, and the risks of her dying from abortion related complications, are even higher if the abortion is done in the second trimester and beyond.” [Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, 11/1/2021]

Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine Infantilizes Pregnant People For Determining Their Own Reproductive Health Outcomes. “It is time for those of us in the medical profession to boldly defend the lives of all of our patients and demand that our preborn patients be protected and our pregnant patients be empowered instead of lied to. Women and their children deserve our support, not the destruction of abortion.” [Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, 11/1/2021]

Prior To Its Official Formation, The Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine’s Member Organizations Decried Fetal Tissue Research In A 2020 Statement On COVID-19 Vaccines. “It is … profoundly important to recognize the vaccines that may have been developed with the use of abortion-derived fetal cell lines. This awareness is necessary from the perspective of both the health care professional and the patient, and every participant in this process deserves to know the source of the vaccine used to allow them to follow their moral conscience. It is long overdue for researchers to abandon the use of abortion-derived cells.” [American College of Pediatricians, 11/2020]

When Texas’ Six-Week Abortion Ban Enforced By Civil Lawsuits Took Effect In September 2021, Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine Applauded The Ban. “We represent approximately 30,000 physicians and other healthcare professionals who believe all pregnant women and their preborn babies deserve excellent healthcare. As such, we applaud Texas’s passion for protecting preborn children.” [Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, 9/2021]

• Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine Uses Medical Disinformation About Abortion Care. “The medical evidence very clearly shows that it causes an increased risk of preterm birth in future pregnancies, increased risk of breast cancer, higher risk of mental health disorders (including suicide) and a significant risk for maternal mortality.” [Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, 9/2021]

• Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine Uses Infantilizing Language Toward Pregnant People. “Abortion is not healthcare for the preborn child or her mother. … Since it is an antiquated myth that an unplanned pregnancy ruins every chance a woman or her child has to succeed in life, we recommend supporting women throughout and after their unplanned pregnancies.” [Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, 9/2021]

Davis Is Listed As Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine’s Registered Agent With The Texas Comptroller. [Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, accessed 3/28/23]

Davis Is A Partner At Morgan Williamson LLP In Amarillo, Texas. [NARAL Pro-Choice America, 3/1/23]

Davis Is A Member Of The Christian Legal Society, Which Filed An Amicus Brief In Support Of Mississippi In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. [NARAL Pro-Choice America, 3/1/23]

Francis Is Listed As The President Of Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine In A March 2022 Letter Organized By The Ethics And Public Policy Center.  [Ethics and Public Policy Center, 3/11/22]

At A February 2022 AAPLOG Conference, Francis Informed Attendees Of The Newly Formed Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine And Encouraged Them To Serve As Expert Witnesses In Upcoming Court Cases. “Last February, at a conference hosted by her organization, the American Association of Pro-Life OB/GYNs, Dr. Christina Francis made an exciting announcement. She and her colleagues were making an impassioned pitch for the medical providers attending the conference to train as expert witnesses for impending court cases—and to be ready to push information about the dangers of the rising threat of medication abortion, in particular. She told the attendees that AAPLOG would be joining together with the American College of Pediatricians—a right-wing, anti-abortion organization, often confused with the American Academy of Pediatrics—and with the Catholic Medical Association and Christian Medical and Dental Association to create a new umbrella group: the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine. ‘Once we are official, we’ll be coordinating a lot of these expert witness trainings,’ she said.” [The Nation, 3/16/23]

Erin Hawley, Wife Of Anti-Choice Senator Josh Hawley, Is A Key Lawyer On The FDA Lawsuit. “Erin Morrow Hawley, an attorney and wife of one of Missouri’s senators, is at the center of a federal lawsuit in Texas that could cancel approval of a common drug used to terminate pregnancies. Hawley is one of the key lawyers fighting to end the Food and Drug Administration’s decades-old approval of mifepristone … Whether or not Hawley and the other attorneys on the Texas case are successful, they are pushing the legal envelope following the end of Roe. Hawley is helping to pioneer a new frontier of abortion litigation targeting existing — sometimes longstanding — laws and regulations that help uphold abortion access.” [St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 3/17/23]

American Association Of Pro-Life Obstetricians And Gynecologists Is A Member Organization Of Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine. [Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, accessed 4/6/23]

American College Of Pediatricians Is A Member Organization Of Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine. [Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, accessed 4/6/23]

Catholic Medical Association Is A Member Organization Of Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine. [Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, accessed 4/6/23]

Christian Medical & Dental Associations Is A Member Organization Of Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine. [Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, accessed 4/6/23]

Coptic Medical Association Of North America Is A Member Organization Of Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine. [Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, accessed 4/6/23]

Alliance Defending Freedom Is Representing The Anti-Abortion Plaintiffs In Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine et al. v. U.S. Food And Drug Administration et al. [Alliance Defending Freedom, accessed 3/28/23] 

In November 2022, Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine Filed A Lawsuit Against The FDA, Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine et al. v. U.S. Food And Drug Administration et al. “After two decades of engaging the FDA to no avail, Plaintiffs now ask this Court to do what the FDA was and is legally required to do: protect women and girls by holding unlawful, setting aside, and vacating the FDA’s actions to approve chemical abortion drugs and eviscerate crucial safeguards for those who undergo this dangerous drug regimen.” [Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine et al. v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration et al., Case 2:22-cv-00223-Z, 11/18/22]

Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine And Accompanying Plaintiffs Are Represented By The Southern Poverty Law Center-Designated Hate Group Alliance Defending Freedom. [Alliance Defending Freedom, accessed 3/28/23]

Without Having Any Legitimate Scientific Standing, Plaintiffs Claim That The FDA Should Not Have Approved Mifepristone 23 Years Ago, Did Not Have Sufficient Evidence Of Its Safety And Efficacy And Violated The Comstock Act. “The plaintiffs claim, among other things, that the agency (1) impermissibly used a regulatory approval pathway that is only available for treating serious or life-threatening illnesses (and that pregnancy is not such an illness); (2) failed to examine or inappropriately disregarded scientific evidence in approving and setting distribution controls for the drug; and (3) ignored the so-called Comstock Act, federal criminal provisions that restrict the distribution of drugs or other abortion-related articles through the mail or other carriers.” [Congressional Research Service, 2/14/23]

• Plaintiffs’ Claims Are Speculative And Rife With Anti-Abortion Disinformation. “The filing is a jumbled mess of suspect assertions, cloaked in inflammatory and medically inaccurate language. The filing refers to medication abortion as ‘chemical’ abortion and claims that mifepristone ‘starves the baby to death.’ It alleges that medication abortion is far riskier than procedural abortion or carrying a pregnancy to term, which the plaintiffs argue ‘rarely’ leads to threatening complications. They call mifepristone an ‘endocrine disrupter’ that could threaten the normal development of adolescents who take it. And they assert that individuals suffering complications from medication abortion could ‘overwhelm’ the health care system, leading to a flood of blood transfusions that ‘exacerbates the current critical national blood shortage.’” [The Intercept, 2/28/23]

• Plaintiffs’ Legal Claims Have No Substance. “There are so many problems with the federal case in Texas challenging the approval of mifepristone, the first of two drugs given as part of a medication abortion. On the procedural side of things, just to name a few, the statute of limitations has long run out, the plaintiffs have not exhausted their administrative remedies, they haven’t identified a provision of law that has been violated, and their claimed injury makes no sense. On substance, again just to name a few, mifepristone is one of the safest drugs on the market, pregnancy is a medical condition for which the FDA can approve drugs, and the act on which the case relies has been basically a dead letter for a century. This case really is frivolous and should garner no real attention.” [Slate, 3/21/23]

• Plaintiffs’ Evidence Is Flawed And Cherry-Picked. “The openly anti-abortion federal judge presiding over Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. FDA could, at least temporarily, ban abortion drugs any day now. But if he does, reproductive-health care experts say it will be based on deeply flawed evidence that largely rests on cherry-picked studies and a handful of anecdotes from a handful of anti-abortion doctors.” [New Jersey Monitor, 2/10/23]

• Plaintiffs Rely On Biased, Non-Robust Citations, Using Footnotes From The Right-Wing Media Outlet National Review, AAPLOG Member Testimony Before Congress, An Article From The Catholic Medical Association’s Linacre Quarterly And Publications From The Anti-Abortion “Think Tank” Charlotte Lozier Institute, Which Serves As The “Research And Education Arm” Of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America. [Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine et al. v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration et al., Case 2:22-cv-00223-Z, 11/18/22]

• Plaintiffs’ Claims Of Mifepristone’s Safety Lack Any Evidence. “The plaintiffs’ lawyers contended that what they called ‘chemical abortion’ causes ‘cramping, heavy bleeding and severe pain’ and that the F.D.A. had never adequately evaluated the scientific evidence for safety. ‘How many women must die or come close to death before the F.D.A. takes mifepristone off the market?’ said Mr. Baptist, who is also with the Alliance Defending Freedom. Lawyers for the F.D.A. and Danco said that bleeding and cramping were normal consequences of the process of terminating a pregnancy, a sign that the pregnancy tissue was being expelled. They cited years of scientific studies that show that serious complications are rare and that patients need hospitalization less than 1 percent of the time.” [New York Times, 3/15/23]

• Plaintiffs Rely On Infantilizing Pregnant People To Plead Their Case. “[T]he FDA failed America’s women and girls when it chose politics over science and approved chemical abortion drugs for use in the United States. … After two decades of engaging the FDA to no avail, Plaintiffs now ask this Court to do what the FDA was and is legally required to do: protect women and girls by holding unlawful, setting aside, and vacating the FDA’s actions to approve chemical abortion drugs and eviscerate crucial safeguards for those who undergo this dangerous drug regimen.” [Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine et al. v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration et al., Case 2:22-cv-00223-Z, 11/18/22]

• Plaintiffs Bizarrely Argue That Mifepristone Fuels Sex Traffickers’ Ability “To Force Their Victims Into Getting Abortions.” “This decision not only harms women and girls who voluntarily undergo chemical abortions, but it also further helps sex traffickers and sexual abusers to force their victims into getting abortions while preventing the authorities from identifying these victims.” [Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine et al. v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration et al., Case 2:22-cv-00223-Z, 11/18/22]

U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk Ruled To Suspend The FDA’s Approval Of Mifepristone. “A district judge in Texas, with longstanding and outspoken anti-abortion views, suspended the US Food and Drug Administration’s approval of mifepristone, a widely used drug to end pregnancies. But the judge, Matthew Kacsmaryk of the Northern District of Texas, ordered that his decision would not take effect for seven days to allow the federal government time to appeal his decision. Within hours, both the US Justice Department and Danco Laboratories, a manufacturer of mifepristone, announced their plans to challenge the ruling.” [Vox, 4/8/23]

The Decision Is Rooted In An Anti-Human Rights Political Agenda, Not Science. “Medication abortion is the most common way Americans terminate their pregnancies. Mifepristone, when taken alongside misoprostol, has been proven to be safe and effective and is recommended by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the World Health Organization. ‘This is the first time a judge has unilaterally, against the FDA’s objections, removed a drug from the market,’ said Greer Donley, a University of Pittsburgh law professor who studies FDA law. ‘A judge who has … no scientific expertise, overruling the agency that has a ton of scientific expertise.’” [The Texas Tribune, 4/7/23]

• Kacsmaryk’s Ruling Was Filled With Disinformation About Mifepristone And Harmful Anti-Abortion Myths. “Kacsmaryk wrote that the FDA succumbed to political pressure when it approved mifepristone more than 20 years ago and subsequently lifted restrictions on the medication over the ensuing two decades, arguing that ‘the lack of restrictions resulted in many deaths and many more severe or life-threatening adverse reactions.’ […] Kacsmaryk has deep ties to the anti-abortion movement, and the language in the 67-page ruling, released at 5:30 p.m. Friday, reflects those ties — calling abortion providers ‘abortionists’ and describing the use of mifepristone as killing or ‘starv[ing] the unborn human until death.’” [The Texas Tribune, 4/7/23]

Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine Strategically Filed Its Lawsuit In The United States District Court For The Northern District Of Texas’ Amarillo Division. “The Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, a new anti-abortion umbrella group that is spearheading a sweeping federal challenge to medication abortion, incorporated in Texas just months before filing suit. The incorporation documents, obtained from the Texas secretary of state, provide further evidence that the plaintiffs cherry-picked a court they believed would be amenable to their arguments, an act of forum shopping that was orchestrated to land the case before Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, a Trump-appointed darling of the far right. The Alliance incorporated in Amarillo in August 2022 […] Three months later, the lawsuit was filed in the same Texas Panhandle city where Kacsmaryk hears all federal civil cases.”  [The Intercept, 2/28/23]

• The Lawsuit Was Purposefully Filed So That Anti-Abortion Judge Kacsmaryk Would Hear The Case. “When anti-abortion groups wanted to challenge the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of an abortion-inducing drug, they didn’t file the lawsuit in Maryland, where the FDA is headquartered, or in any state where the pill is still legally prescribed. They filed it in Amarillo, a Texas city that didn’t have an abortion clinic even before the state all but banned the procedure. But Amarillo does have a federal courthouse with, importantly, just one federal judge presiding. U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk hears 95% of the cases filed in Amarillo.” [The Texas Tribune, 3/15/23]

On August 16, The Fifth Circuit Court Of Appeals Ruled To Reinstate Unnecessary And Burdensome Restrictions On Mifepristone, But Did Not Pull The Medication From The Market. “A federal appeals court said Wednesday that it would restrict access to a widely used abortion medication […] Food and Drug Administration decisions to allow the drug mifepristone to be taken later in pregnancy, be mailed directly to patients and be prescribed by a medical professional other than a doctor were not lawful, a three-judge panel of the conservative U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit ruled. Mifepristone will remain available for now under existing regulations while the litigation continues, in accordance with a Supreme Court order this spring.” [The Washington Post, 8/16/23]

If Upheld, The Fifth Circuit’s Decision Would Reinstate Pre-2016 Unscientific And Onerous Restrictions On The Medication, Including Ending Accessibility Of Mifepristone By Mail. “The main impact of the appeals court’s decision, if it is upheld by the Supreme Court, would be to reverse changes made by the F.D.A. in recent years that greatly increased access to the pill […] The appeals court ruling would mean that patients would have to make three visits to a doctor to get mifepristone and could not receive it in the mail. […] Among the changes the F.D.A. made in 2016 were to allow nurse midwives and certain other providers, not just doctors, to prescribe mifepristone and to reduce the required number of in-person visits to one. Another change was to extend the time frame for mifepristone use, authorizing it until 10 weeks into pregnancy instead of seven weeks.” [The New York Times, 8/16/23]

A Stay By The Supreme Court Means Any Medication Abortion Ban Remains On Hold. “A federal appeals court ruled Wednesday that mifepristone, one of two pills used in medication abortions, should not be prescribed past seven weeks of pregnancy or via telemedicine. However, a previous stay by the Supreme Court means this won’t go into effect right away. The pills will remain on the market in states where abortion is legal and available by telemedicine and mail for the time being.” [NPR, 8/16/23]

The DOJ Stated It Would Ask The Supreme Court To Review The Case. “The federal Department of Justice is defending the Food and Drug Administration in the case. A spokesperson for DOJ said the department strongly disagrees with the ruling and is looking for the Supreme Court to review it. […] The Supreme Court could decide to hear the case in the fall, possibly with another case from Washington state that seeks to expand access to the medicine. If it decides not to hear the case, the 5th circuit’s decision could stand.” [NPR, 8/16/23]

If Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. FDA, Is Ultimately Decided In Favor Of The Plaintiffs, This Would Cause Significant Harm To Pregnant People. “Plaintiffs’ speculative assertions of injury—made months and even decades after the agency actions they challenge—are unsupported by any evidence that Plaintiffs will be harmed by the availability of mifepristone absent an injunction. In contrast, issuance of a preliminary injunction would cause significant harm, depriving patients of a safe and effective drug that has been on the market for more than two decades.” [FDA and DOJ opposition, Case 2:22-cv-00223-Z, 1/13/23] 

Limiting Medication Abortion, Which Accounts For More Than Half Of All Abortions, Would Severely Limit The Accessibility Of Abortion Care. “The ability for patients to use telemedicine and get the prescribed pills shipped to them has significantly expanded the use of medication abortion, which is now used in more than half of pregnancy terminations in the United States. […] More than five million women in the United States have used mifepristone to terminate their pregnancies, and many studies have found it to be highly safe and effective. Years of research has shown that serious complications are rare, resulting in fewer than 1 percent of patients needing hospitalization, medical experts have said. The F.D.A. applies a special regulatory framework to mifepristone, meaning that it has been regulated much more strictly and studied more intensively than most other drugs. The drug is also approved for use in dozens of other countries.” [The New York Times, 8/16/23]

An Anti-Reproductive Freedom Decision Would Harm The Public Interest. “[I]t would upend the status quo and the reliance interests of patients and doctors who depend on mifepristone. … The public interest would be dramatically harmed by effectively withdrawing from the marketplace a safe and effective drug that has lawfully been on the market for twenty-two years.” [FDA and DOJ opposition, Case 2:22-cv-00223-Z, 1/13/23] 

A Ban On Mifepristone Would Exacerbate Inequitable Health Outcomes For Pregnant People. “[B]ecause carrying a pregnancy to term is 14 times more risky than early abortion, foreclosing access to medication abortion would likely lead to a steep rise in birth-related mortality rates. Evidence shows that States with restrictive abortion laws have higher morbidity and mortality rates. And estimates suggest that should a total abortion ban go into effect nationwide, those rates would rise by 21% overall purely due to the increased risks associated with bearing a child, with Black women experiencing the highest estimated increase—33%. Accordingly, impeding access to medication abortion, the method currently accounting for the majority of all abortions, would undoubtedly lead to an unprecedented spike in mortality, worsening a crisis already disproportionately faced by Black women.” [Amicus Brief of Democratic State Attorneys General, Case 2:22-cv-00223-Z, 2/10/23]

• Likewise, A Ban On Mifepristone Would Exacerbate Inequitable Socioeconomic Outcomes For Parents And Children. “Denial of abortion is in turn associated with numerous harms, including poor birthing and infant health outcomes, higher rates of poverty, and lower educational attainment for both parents and children.” [Amicus Brief of Democratic State Attorneys General, Case 2:22-cv-00223-Z, 2/10/23]

Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine’s Anti-Abortion Narratives Are Fueling Hostility Toward Reproductive Freedom And Equitable Health Care Access. “While the alternate narratives pushed by groups like AAPLOG may be politically powerful, they are also dangerous, offering the imprimatur of science without sound foundational support. ‘When you have arguments about science that are not based that much in evidence, not only is it confusing and obviously can lead to really bad outcomes, but it’s also disenfranchising,’ [law professor Mary] Ziegler said. ‘Because normal people don’t know anything about these topics, right? They don’t know about the relative rate of complications of mifepristone. And so if what’s really going on here is a struggle over constitutional values and ethics and so on, we should be telling the truth about that.’” [The Intercept, 2/28/23]

Organizations That Submitted Amicus Briefs For Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine et al. Include Charlotte Lozier Institute, Concerned Women For America, Ethics And Public Policy Center, Family Research Council, Human Coalition And Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America. [Justia, accessed 3/28/23]

Four Of Five Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine Partnering Organizations Supported The Anti-Abortion Congressional Bill “Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act.” “Over 30,000 medical professionals from the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, American College of Pediatricians, Christian Medical & Dental Associations, Catholic Medical Association and Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, supported the bill. In a statement, they said, ‘There is no scientific or legal reason to distinguish between human beings born after an attempted abortion and human beings born after attempted live birth. In cases where the mother’s life actually is in danger in the latter half of pregnancy, there is not time for an abortion. … We can, and do, save the life of the mother through delivery of an intact infant in a hospital where both the mother and her newborn can receive the care that they need. There is no medical reason to intentionally kill that fetal human being.’” [The Center Square, 1/13/23]

All Five Of Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine’s Partnering Organizations Supported A Letter From Congressional Republicans To The DOJ And HHS About Conscience Protections, Which When Unregulated Hinder Access To Abortion Care. [U.S. Senator Kevin Cramer, 8/18/21]

Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine Was Incorporated In Texas On August 5, 2022 And Shares An Address With Christian Medical & Dental Associations In Bristol, Tennessee. 

[Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, accessed 3/28/23]

Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine Was Registered In Tennessee As A 501(c)(3) Non-Profit In February 2023 And Has Tax-Exempt Status.

[ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer, accessed 3/28/23]