The Ohio attorney general's office tried again yesterday to save a state law that restricts the use of a pill that induces abortion.

The law was supposed to take effect in 2004, but it has been tied up in federal court for four years and has never been enforced.

Lawyers for Attorney General Marc Dann asked the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals yesterday to overturn a lower court's ruling that the law was vague and, therefore, unconstitutional.

Planned Parenthood, which sued to block enforcement of the law, contends that the law is so confusing and unclear that doctors could face criminal charges for acts they did not know were illegal.

The state's interpretation of the law "would subject physicians to potentially limitless requirements," Planned Parenthood's attorneys argued.

The law would make it illegal for doctors to prescribe the pill, known as RU-486, after the seventh week of pregnancy, as recommended by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 1999.

The problem, according to Planned Parenthood, is that the law refers to an FDA approval letter, as well as 90 other documents related to the use of RU-486.

Mimi Liu, Planned Parenthood's attorney, told the judges yesterday that the regulations make it impossible for doctors to know what activity might run afoul of the law.

Anne Berry Strait, an assistant attorney general, said Planned Parenthood opposes the law because it does not like it, not because it's confusing.

"Planned Parenthood and its physicians understand exactly what the act does and means," the state's attorneys wrote in a brief defending the law.

The three judges questioned whether the law even belonged in federal court, suggesting that the Ohio Supreme Court might be a more appropriate venue.

They were asked to consider the case after U.S. District Judge Susan J. Dlott ruled in favor of Planned Parenthood and barred enforcement of the law. the panel's decision is expected this year.

dhorn@enquirer.com