SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
mifepristone
26 Years Since its Approval, Dr. Heidi Overton’s Nomination Leaves Mifepristone in Limbo
If confirmed as FDA chief, Overton will join the growing list of notably unqualified candidates this administration has nominated at the expense of the American people.
Sep 28, 2026
Last week, the US Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee held a hearing for President Donald Trump’s nominee to lead the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Dr. Heidi Overton.
During the hearing, Dr. Overton followed suit with many of Trump’s previous nominees for federal agencies—avoiding questions, obscuring her true intentions, and feigning ignorance of her own public record on a range of topics.
Her nomination comes at a fraught moment for the agency. The FDA is facing heavy criticism following a Cyclospora outbreak that sickened many and rattled the public. The prior commissioner abruptly resigned after only 13 months in the role. The agency has also wrestled with political pressure on everything from reproductive health to vaccinations to flavored e-cigarettes, imperiling its historic scientific neutrality and risking a descent into partisan miasma.
Dr. Overton remains dangerously out of step with the general public, medicine, and science on the subject of medication abortion with mifepristone and her record explicitly showcases that she will do everything in her power to ban medication abortion.
The FDA works best when publicly unnoticed, operating smoothly and uncontroversially in the background of our country, keeping us safe. It is vital to our economy as well as our health. Take, for example, my home state of Ohio. Healthcare is our largest employment sector, and nearly half of our land is farmland. As a maternal fetal medicine physician, the scope of my work is providing the best care to my patients and advising on the available options to receive comprehensive medical care.
Therefore, we need an FDA leader steeped in objective, scientific neutrality rather than the culture wars Americans are so tired of — and Dr. Overton is a far cry from what is needed in this moment.
This week marks 26 years since the FDA initially approved mifepristone as safe and effective. Since the Dobbs decision, mifepristone has emerged as a linchpin in the preservation of access to abortion care for millions of patients. It also rests atop an enormous bedrock of research and clinical trials expounding its safety and efficacy.
As of December 2025, medication abortion has accounted for 65% of all US abortions, and one in four clinician-provided abortions were delivered through telehealth. Mifepristone specifically is used to support patients with their reproductive care and is even recommended by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists for miscarriage management.
The American Medical Association has stated that serious adverse events occur in fewer than one-third of one percent of patients who take mifepristone, and continuing a pregnancy carries roughly 14 times the risk of death than abortion related complications. Reimposing in-person requirements, the AMA warns, would eliminate access for rural, low-income, and underserved patients and limit the quality of care that doctors are able to provide. In February 2026, ACOG led a coalition of 15 medical organizations in defending mifepristone's safety record in court.
And yet, Dr. Overton remains dangerously out of step with the general public, medicine, and science on the subject of medication abortion with mifepristone and her record explicitly showcases that she will do everything in her power to ban medication abortion.
She celebrated the overturning of Roe v. Wade as “a huge victory for life,” dismissed federal legislation protecting abortion rights as “radicalism,” and has promoted misinformation about the safety of medication abortion that contradicts more than two decades of evidence. As a member of the America First Policy Institute, Overton authored position papers advocating draconian federal regulation of medication abortion. Such measures would dangerously cripple access to safe abortion.
Her nomination to this role is a threat to women’s health, the credibility of the FDA, and the wellbeing of every American. That’s why I joined over 160+ patients, physicians, and advocates from across the country in signing a letter to Senators to reject her nomination.
Beyond politics, it has been noted that Dr. Overton lacks the administrative experience necessary to manage an organization as large as the FDA, with thousands of employees. If confirmed, she would report to an HHS secretary who also lacked significant administrative experience. When RFK Jr. faced nomination, much of the focus was on his lack of training in science, medicine, or healthcare. Less discussed was his lack of management experience, the consequences of which have been evident in the organizational disarray at HHS.
Dr. Overton has laudable academic credentials, including a PhD from Johns Hopkins. But a prestigious degree and impressive publications alone are not enough to lead one of the country’s most consequential healthcare agencies. They are the table stakes, not the winning hand.
You have to have experience running a large organization to be charged with leading another large organization. Given the respective stakes at the FDA, we should not be rolling those dice.
A physician-leader who can do everything is a truly amazing person: someone who treats patients as a doctor, educates as a teacher, investigates as a scientist, and manages thousands of employees with administrative ease. Such people are rare, but they exist. We know who they are, and these are the people who should be considered for such a critical role at the FDA — not Dr. Overton
If confirmed, Dr. Overton will join the growing list of notably unqualified candidates this administration has nominated at the expense of the American people, and we must continue to speak up against these affronts on our democracy.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Court Lets US Abortion Pill Access Continue—Until Trump FDA Finishes Review Condemned as 'Sham'
A federal judge opted not to rule on a lawsuit seeking to overturn FDA approval of mifepristone until the FDA completes a review that has been described as a political pretext to restrict abortion.
Aug 31, 2026
Access to the abortion drug mifepristone will remain unchanged in the US for now after a federal district judge on Sunday paused a lawsuit aimed at overturning the Food and Drug Administration's approval of the medication. But he left the door open for the Trump administration to restrict access to the drug.
US District Judge Reed O'Connor of the Northern District of Texas refused the manufacturer's motion to dismiss a lawsuit brought by Texas and Florida seeking to overturn FDA approval of mifepristone altogether. But the judge accepted the US Department of Justice's (DOJ) motion to stay the case until December 1, or until the FDA completes a "review" of the drug that it will use to determine whether access to it should be tightened.
That FDA review, spearheaded by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., has been criticized as a politicized effort to create a pretext for the anti-abortion Trump administration to restrict abortion pill access, including in states where the procedure is legal.
Nearly 700,000 people use mifepristone per year, according to the Guttmacher Institute, which has found it to be the method for the majority of US abortions in recent years.
Receiving it through the mail via out-of-state telehealth providers has become a go-to method for those in states with bans on terminating a pregnancy. The drug has been used by around 7.5 million people since it was first approved in 2000.
The FDA's own current webpage states that its periodic reviews of mifepristone have “not identified any new safety concerns” and that the drug is safe when used as directed. Prior FDA reviews have found that hospitalization occurs in only 0.04-0.6% of all medication abortions.
Despite the lack of any clearly identified risk, the Trump FDA has said that the ongoing review could lead to “substantive changes" to the Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy for the drug, leading some to argue that it is a "sham" meant to create a scientific justification for the administration's goal of restricting abortion.
"Ensuring legal access to mifepristone in the long term is vital to women’s healthcare and reproductive freedom," said Evan Masingill, the CEO of GenBioPro, which manufactures generic mifepristone and sued to defend the FDA's approval of its product.
"We expect the FDA’s review of mifepristone to not contradict the decision they made in 2023 that reaffirmed our product is safe and effective," Masingill said.
The US Supreme Court ruled earlier this year that lower courts could not block the FDA's 2023 decision, under the Biden administration, to lift in-person dispensing requirements for mifepristone following the overturning of Roe v. Wade the previous year. The in-person requirement was lifted following a 2021 FDA review that deemed the rules unnecessary.
The Supreme Court has previously blocked individual anti-abortion doctors from bringing lawsuits against the FDA, ruling that they did not have standing to claim personal injury.
But Texas and Florida have sought to get around this by suing as states, and so far, courts have allowed them to do so. The conservative 5th Circuit accepted a similar argument from Louisiana earlier this year.
However, O'Connor—an appointee of former President George W. Bush—did not rule on the merits of whether the states' claims against the FDA were correct.
But even if that lawsuit fails, the Trump administration could dramatically curtail access to mifepristone by reinstating in-person dispensing requirements, placing new limits on which pharmacies can dispense the drug, and adding new requirements for prescribers and patients.
“The FDA has affirmed time and again that mifepristone is safe and effective,” said Skye Perryman, President and CEO of Democracy Forward, which is representing the drugmaker. “Far-right, anti-science extremists may be pressuring the Trump-Vance administration to reach a different, ideologically-driven outcome, but we will continue to represent our clients to hold the FDA to the same science-based standards it has long applied to protect people’s ability to access effective, evidence-based healthcare, including protecting access to medication abortion.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Ahead of Confirmation Vote, Groups Blast Blanche Vow Subject 'Every Single State' to Anti-Abortion Laws
"Anti-abortion zealots like Todd Blanche would not stop until they could restrict our bodily autonomy to the furthest degree," said one critic.
Aug 05, 2026
Reproductive rights groups are sounding the alarm about a recent pledge made by acting US Attorney General Todd Blanche to make every state adhere to anti-abortion laws passed in red states.
In a phone call last week hosted by the White House Faith Office, Blanche told a religious group that he would work would work to ensure the US Supreme Court's Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision that overturned the constitutional right to an abortion “becomes permanent in every single state.”
During the call, Blanche hinted that the Trump administration would place restrictions on the ability to mail drugs such as mifepristone to states that have outlawed abortion.
"If states have said, ‘We are going to protect the unborn and we’re going to protect every life from the moment of conception,’ we’re putting practices and policies in place so that other states and other organizations can’t attack that,” Blanche said. "They can’t do things like they’re doing with mailing in mail-order drugs."
In an analysis published Wednesday, journalist Jessica Valenti argued that Blanche's pledge would not result in a nationwide ban on abortions, but rather "stopping the shipping of abortion medication under the auspices of adhering to Dobbs."
"If we lost telemedicine abortion, there would be devastating national consequences," Valenti emphasized. "You could even argue—and I have!—that banning the shipping of abortion pills amounts to a backdoor national ban."
In a Tuesday social media post, Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minn.) highlighted Blanche's call and warned that confirming him as AG permanently would be a green light to assault women's rights.
"Todd Blanche made clear in these secret calls with anti-choice activists that he wants to resurrect the Comstock Act—an antiquated anti-vice law from before women had the right to vote—to ban sending medication abortion in the mail," wrote Smith. "Republicans will likely do what they always do and confirm Blanche as attorney general despite all of this, and once again, women across America will pay the price."
Mini Timmaraju, president and CEO of Reproductive Freedom for All, accused Blanche of "making dangerous promises behind closed doors to weaponize the Justice Department to enact a national abortion ban."
"We must believe Blanche when he says he will come for our rights," Timmaraju added. "Republicans are using every lever of government to attack reproductive freedom, and voters will make their voices heard this November to take our Congress back from these extremists."
Nourbese Flint, president of All* Above All, called Blanche's promise "an open declaration of his intention to use the Justice Department to stop the delivery of abortion medication."
"The lie they told us in the aftermath of Dobbs was that it was about sending abortion law back to the states," Flint said, "but we have known all along that anti-abortion zealots like Todd Blanche would not stop until they could restrict our bodily autonomy to the furthest degree."
Keep ReadingShow Less
4 Years Ago, Trump's GOP Took Away Our Abortion Rights—Now, We Must Regain Congress to Win Them Back
As long as Republicans are in power, none of our rights are safe. They are decided election by election, one seat in Congress at a time.
Jun 24, 2026
Years before Republicans overturned Roe v. Wade, I sat in a hospital bed, preparing for my own abortion after a devastating pregnancy loss.
The grief was consuming. My husband and I were mourning the abrupt loss of a future we had longed for. At the time, I never considered myself to be fortunate. That feeling didn’t seep in until nearly eight years later—when Republicans began passing extreme abortion bans across the nation, unleashing widespread, preventable suffering upon millions of women.
In that hospital room, I was surrounded by compassionate doctors who offered me a choice between a surgical or medication abortion—the best forms of treatment available to prevent severe bleeding and infection. Yet now, those same methods of care are considered felonies across dozens of states, and are being actively targeted by Republicans. While I was welcomed into the wing of my local hospital for the procedure, women today are forced to travel hundreds of miles for care or told to wait in hospital parking lots until their lives are in jeopardy before they can legally be treated. While I took time to recover at home—both physically and emotionally—after leaving the hospital, women today are handcuffed, investigated, and even threatened with murder charges after suffering their own miscarriages.
Republicans have made it clear: They don’t care about the cruelty of their bans, the women’s lives that are being lost to them, or that the vast majority of Americans want abortion access to be legal and protected. Their extremist agenda has not only stripped women of their freedoms; it has caused widespread pain—including sharp spikes in life-threatening infections, infant and maternal deaths, and worse miscarriage outcomes than in states without abortion restrictions.
As attacks remain in full steam, abortion has already had an outsized influence on the 2026 midterms.
But the most horrifying part of all is that Republicans are not stopping here.
Emboldened by extremist MAGA allies, the US Supreme Court is currently considering whether to outlaw telehealth, mail, and pharmacy delivery for abortion medication, instead requiring patients to obtain it in person. Meanwhile, the Trump administration is conducting a sham Food and Drug Administration “review” of mifepristone—a safe, effective, and FDA-approved medication used in the majority of abortions in the US—in order to lay the groundwork for national restrictions. These attacks could result in the biggest rollback to abortion access since the Dobbs decision.
As the president of EMILYs List, I’ve seen firsthand that Republicans’ relentless pursuit of their anti-abortion agenda remains a motivator for voters nationwide. American women are fed up with their bodies, their health, and their lives being treated like political pawns—and until Republicans stop attacking our rights, the desire to protect abortion will continue driving voters to the polls.
That proved true in 2025, when Mikie Sherrill and Abigail Spanberger won historic governorships against anti-abortion Republicans who had clear intentions of enacting extreme restrictions in their home states. Abortion was also one of the most powerful drivers of Democratic wins downballot across Virginia, where every EMILYs List-endorsed woman running to flip a Republican-held seat did just that in November, protecting our majority in the House of Delegates and protecting Virginians from a surefire ban.
As attacks remain in full steam, abortion has already had an outsized influence on the 2026 midterms. Over the last two months, I’ve met with voters on the ground across the nation, including in key US House flip districts, where Denise Powell (Neb.-02), Lindsay James (Iowa-02), and Marni Von Wilpert (Calif.-48) battled out competitive primary victories solidified by their staunch pro-choice bonafides. We’re seeing this at the state level too, like in Pennsylvania, where Brittany Bloam (Pa.-HD45) cruised to a primary win over Pat Catena, a Democrat who unsuccessfully tried rebranding as pro-choice, despite a record proving the exact opposite.
Voters trust women like these to fight for abortion access in their communities because they have never wavered in their support of women’s right to choose, and they have the track record to prove it. These women are our strongest pathway to taking back power in Congress and pumping the breaks on Republicans’ unhinged agenda.
Four years without Roe, it’s clearer than ever: As long as Republicans are in power, none of our rights are safe. They are decided election by election, one seat in Congress at a time. And this November, they depend wholly on firing anti-abortion Republicans, and electing Democratic pro-choice women to lead the fight to take back our freedoms.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Abortion Bans Not Only Harm Patients, But Cost US Economy $140 Billion: Analysis
States that deny people's bodily autonomy limit "their ability to pursue the education and career options that are right for them, and to build financial stability," said the Institute for Women's Policy Research president.
Jun 16, 2026
Reproductive rights advocates and experts have long highlighted the dangers of abortion bans to people's health, but amid a wave of new state-level restrictions in the wake of Roe v. Wade's reversal, some have also recently emphasized the economic impact, as detailed in an analysis published Tuesday by the Institute for Women's Policy Research.
"IWPR's latest estimates show that states with the most restrictive abortion policies could cost the national economy nearly $68 billion annually in lost earnings, up from $64 billion in last year's estimate," according to the analysis. "Historically, legal abortion access has increased women's labor force participation and earnings. IWPR's analyses suggest that abortion restrictions continue to erode those gains nationwide, reducing women's labor force participation and earnings potential while weakening state and national economies in the process."
"Those losses—amounting to billions of dollars—could otherwise support what families actually need: affordable healthcare, caregiving, higher wages, business growth, and new jobs that strengthen local communities and state economies," the report notes. "This $68 billion estimate reflects only the impact of the most severe restrictions, including total bans and six-week gestational bans, that were in effect in 16 states in 2025."
The publication points out that "many other states may not have banned abortion outright, but still impose barriers that make abortion care harder to access, like waiting periods, mandated counseling, or targeted regulations on abortion providers that delay or deny care altogether. When accounting for all state-level restrictions on abortion access, combined with the federal funding prohibitions and the absence of federal protections, the annual average economic cost now exceeds $140 billion nationwide."
The overall figure is nearly $7 billion more than IWPR's estimate from last year. Putting that figure into context, the report explains that $7 billion "could fund Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits for about 1 million American families with children for an entire year. This is a striking figure considering the so-called 'One Big Beautiful Bill's' cuts to the program, which are projected to reduce or eliminate benefits for many low-income households."
Removing barriers to reproductive care on a national scale "could mean nearly 325,000 more women participating in the labor force each year, with the largest increases concentrated in states with some of the most restrictive abortion policies," IWPR estimated. For example, in Alabama, Kentucky, and Louisiana, their labor force participation could be over 1.3% higher, while in Mississippi, it could be up 1.5%.
If more women joined the workforce thanks to policies allowing reproductive freedom, IWPR projected that "national gross domestic product (GDP) could rise by 0.5%, and the economic gains would be largest in states such as Alabama, Arkansas, South Carolina, and West Virginia, which rank poorly on both abortion protections and per capita GDP. These states could potentially see their GDP grow by nearly 1% annually."
Like previous analyses, the publication also acknowledges that "Black and Latina women are more likely to experience the consequences of restrictive abortion policies and confront additional economic and structural barriers to accessing care that their White counterparts do not—even as abortion restrictions harm all women and the economy more broadly."
IWPR president and CEO Jamila K. Taylor stressed in a Tuesday statement that "this is fundamentally about human rights and economic justice."
"We know that legal access to abortion care increases women's autonomy to be able to participate in the labor force, which supports the stability of our entire economy," Taylor said. "When states deny people their bodily autonomy, they're also limiting their ability to pursue the education and career options that are right for them and to build financial stability for their family and community. Abortion restrictions don't just harm those who may become pregnant—they harm everyone."
President Donald Trump delivered mixed messages during the last campaign cycle: bragging about being the one to appoint the justices who helped reverse Roe with the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision, but also suggesting that he wasn't in favor of a nationwide ban on abortion and that the issue doesn't really matter to Americans.
Since returning to the White House, the Republican and his allies in Congress have taken steps to reduce access to reproductive healthcare, and although the right-wing Supreme Court last month declined to restrict access to mifepristone, at least for now, Trump's Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is currently reviewing the medication, which is commonly used in abortion and miscarriage care.
Reproductive rights advocates have sounded the alarm over the FDA review. In response to reporting on it earlier this month, Planned Parenthood CEO Alexis McGill Johnson called it "a politically motivated farce."
"Mifepristone is safe and effective. We know it, the FDA knows it, and the more than 7.5 million people who've used mifepristone for abortion and miscarriage care over the past 25 years know it too," Johnson said. "But the Trump administration is bulldozing the overwhelming body of medical research and evidence to try to make it harder for everyone, everywhere to get an abortion. It's time for every American to take this threat seriously."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Temporary Relief Isn't Enough,' Advocates Warn After Supreme Court Blocks Abortion Pill Restrictions
"We are relieved that access to mifepristone remains protected for now, but this should never have been on the table in the first place," said one campaigner.
May 14, 2026
While welcoming that the US Supreme Court on Thursday blocked restrictions on dispensing mifepristone—a medication commonly used in abortion and miscarriage care—as a legal battle over it moves forward, rights advocates also continued to sound the alarm about attacks on reproductive freedom and argue that "temporary relief isn't enough."
At issue is the 2023 Food and Drug Administration (FDA) decision to permanently lift mifepristone's in-person dispensing requirement, which has enabled doctors to serve patients nationwide via telehealth and the mail, as forced pregnancy advocates have intensified the fight for state laws cutting off access to abortion care since the Supreme Court reversed Roe v. Wade in 2022.
Louisiana sued over the FDA's move, and early this month, the notoriously right-wing US Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit halted the agency's rule easing restrictions. Drugmakers Danco Laboratories and GenBioPro appealed, and Justice Samuel Alito, a member of the high court's right-wing supermajority, issued a one-week stay, which he then extended to Thursday evening.
With that deadline looming, the court ultimately blocked the 5th Circuit's ruling. Alito and Justice Clarence Thomas, another right-winger, dissented.
"While it is good news that, for now, patients can continue to get this safe medication by mail and at pharmacies as they have for more than five years, we all know abortion opponents are continuing their unpopular and baseless attacks," Julia Kaye, senior staff attorney for the ACLU's Reproductive Freedom Project, said in a statement.
"And let's be clear about the Trump administration's role here: When nationwide access to a critical abortion and miscarriage medication was on the line, the Trump administration refused to defend the FDA's action and threw patients under the bus," Kaye noted. "The American people have made clear time and again that they oppose political efforts to interfere with their ability to make their own healthcare decisions—and the ACLU will keep fighting with them every step of the way."
Advocates stressed that the fight is far from over. Monica Simpson, executive director of SisterSong: Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective, said that her organization "is relieved that the Supreme Court granted the emergency appeal to keep mifepristone accessible through telehealth and mail nationwide."
"This decision ensures that people, especially Black, brown, queer, trans, immigrant, poor, and people living in rural communities who already face barriers to healthcare, can continue accessing essential reproductive care," she noted. "While today's decision prevents immediate harm, people's lives shouldn't hang in the balance between back-and-forth litigation."
"Attacks on mifepristone have never been about safety or medicine," Simpson added. "They are about power and control—about who gets to make decisions about their body, their family, and their future."
All* Above All president Nourbese Flint also welcomed the decision while arguing that "the fact that patients and providers were forced to endure the confusion and disruption of care because of yet another court ruling on whether basic healthcare would remain available is unacceptable."
"This legal whiplash is exhausting, dangerous, and completely disconnected from science," Flint continued. "We know that mifepristone is safe and effective, and has been for over 25 years. People should not have to navigate a week-to-week roller coaster just to find out if they can still access basic healthcare and medication they need."
Serra Sippel, executive director of the Brigid Alliance, which helps people forced to travel for abortion care, similarly said that "we are relieved that access to mifepristone remains protected for now, but this should never have been on the table in the first place. Patients and providers should not be forced to wait on court rulings to know whether people can access critical healthcare."
"The back-and-forth of this case does have a cost. Confusion and uncertainty can delay care, and every day makes a difference. When people are pushed later into pregnancy, care becomes harder to access, more expensive, and many more miles further from home," Sippel explained. "We're seeing this firsthand. Last year, the Brigid Alliance helped 1,879 people travel for abortion care—a 35% increase from the year before—and those numbers will continue to rise as state abortion restrictions force more people to cross state lines for care."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Supreme Court Temporarily Extends Abortion Pill Access, But 'Care Is Still Under Attack Every Day'
"Mifepristone is safe and effective, and women should be able to get abortion medication through the mail or telehealth if they need," said Sen. Patty Murray.
May 11, 2026
Defenders of reproductive rights, including key Democrats in Congress, reiterated the safety of mifepristone on Monday after the US Supreme Court temporarily extended access to the medication—commonly used in abortion and miscarriage care—by mail while the justices review a ruling from a notoriously right-wing appellate court.
The US Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit blocked a federal rule allowing mifepristone to be dispensed by mail at the beginning of the month. Drugmakers quickly appealed to the high court, where Justice Samuel Alito, who is part of the right-wing supermajority, issued a one-week stay to give himself and colleagues time to review the case.
As Alito's initial Monday evening deadline approached, he extended the stay until 5:00 pm ET on Thursday. The move means that "for now, mifepristone is still available via telehealth, mail order, and pharmacy while the case proceeds," noted the Democratic Women's Caucus in the US House of Representatives.
However, pro-choice advocates and policymakers are still sounding the alarm and arguing that, as the caucus put it in a social media post, "reproductive freedom should not depend on emergency rulings or political attacks."
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said in a statement that "mifepristone has been safe, effective, and trusted for decades. Today's order keeps access in place for now, but it's not cause for celebration—it's a reminder that basic reproductive care is still under attack every day. Anti-abortion extremists are trying to use the courts to roll back access to medication abortion nationwide, and Senate Dems will keep fighting to protect women's freedom to make their own healthcare decisions."
Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) similarly wrote on social media: "Another extension, but this shouldn't be complicated. Mifepristone is safe and effective, and women should be able to get abortion medication through the mail or telehealth if they need. Extremist judges shouldn't get to decide how women get healthcare."
This case traces back to early 2023, when the Biden administration's Food and Drug Administration permanently lifted mifepristone's in-person dispensing requirement, just months after the Supreme Court's right-wing supermajority overturned Roe v. Wade. Louisiana, which has among the most restrictive abortion policies in the country, sued over the FDA's policy change.
Medication abortions account for the majority of abortions provided in the United States, and those patients generally take both mifepristone and another drug, misoprostol. Demand for abortion pills by mail increased after Roe's reversal, as advocates of forced pregnancy policies in Republican-controlled states ramped up attacks on reproductive freedom.
"With the Supreme Court punting a decision on access to mifepristone—a safe, effective medication used in abortion care—until later this week, patients and providers are left facing continued uncertainty," said Rachel Fey, interim co-CEO of Power to Decide. "Wondering day by day whether you'll have access to an essential medication is not practical, and the confusion only deepens the barriers people already face when seeking abortion care."
"Access to mifepristone should be based on scientific evidence, not ideology," Fey declared. "We urge the Supreme Court to follow that science and maintain current telehealth access to mifepristone—not just for a few days at a time, but permanently."
Alito's extensions in recent days are not necessarily signals of where the conservative will ultimately come down. The Associated Press pointed out Monday that "the current dispute is similar to one that reached the court three years ago," when the justices blocked another 5th Circuit ruling "over the dissenting votes of Alito and Justice Clarence Thomas," and then unanimously dismissed that case due to lack of standing, or a legal right to sue.
The battle comes as the Trump administration's FDA is conducting a review of mifepristone that Julia Kaye, senior staff attorney for the ACLU’s Reproductive Freedom Project, has said seems "designed to manufacture an excuse for further restricting medication abortion across the country."
The New York Times noted Monday that US Department of Justice "lawyers have not said in court proceedings or publicly whether they back regulations that allow people to be prescribed the pills through telehealth appointments. Instead, they have asked the lower courts to pause the litigation to give the FDA time to complete a review of the safety of mifepristone, which was first approved in 2000."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Access to Abortion Pill by Mail Restored—For Now—During US Supreme Court Review
"While this is a positive short-term development, no one can rest easy when our ability to get this safe, effective medication for abortion and miscarriage care still hangs in the balance," stressed an ACLU attorney.
May 04, 2026
The US Supreme Court on Monday temporarily restored access to mifepristone, a medication commonly used for abortion and early miscarriage care, through the mail while the justices review a decision requiring it to be dispensed in person by a medical provider.
Justice Samuel Alito, who is part of the high court's right-wing supermajority, oversees the US Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit. He issued a one-week stay for the appellate court's Friday dispensing decision, which critics had condemned as "sweeping and dangerous."
"This is not particularly surprising from Alito. He's the circuit justice here, acting—in essence—until the full court can act," explained Law Dork's Chris Geidner. He noted that both Alito and Justice Clarence Thomas, another right-winger, "have issued administrative stays in the past until the full court can rule in similar circumstances, regardless of their ultimate votes on the matters."
The drug companies Danco Laboratories, which makes the brand-name version of mifepristone, Mifeprex, and GenBioPro, which makes the generic pill, asked the country's top court to intervene following Friday's ruling, which threatened patients nationwide.
"Even this Supreme Court can see that this 5th Circuit decision is reckless," declared Alexis McGill Johnson, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Action Fund, on Monday. "While mifepristone access returns to where it was on Friday morning, the whiplash and chaos that patients and providers are navigating have already had real consequences for real people's lives and futures."
Brittany Fonteno, president and CEO of the National Abortion Federation, similarly highlighted how "this back-and-forth has created confusion and chaos," but welcomed that the high court's "decision provides critical, if temporary, relief for patients and providers and ensures that people can continue to access this essential medication through telehealth while the court considers the case."
"The lower court's ruling disregards the well-established safety and efficacy of the use of mifepristone via telehealth, and any future restriction will create medically unnecessary barriers to care for patients across the country," Fonteno added. "Mifepristone has been safely used for more than 25 years, and is essential to abortion care and miscarriage management in the United States. For many patients, especially those in rural areas or facing financial and logistical barriers, access to telehealth is a critical component of holistic reproductive healthcare."
Since the Supreme Court reversed Roe v. Wade in June 2022, the anti-choice movement and right-wing politicians have ramped up attacks on reproductive freedom at the state level. Meanwhile, the Biden administration's Food and Drug Administration (FDA) permanently lifted mifepristone's in-person dispensing requirement in early 2023, allowing doctors in pro-choice states to serve patients across the country via telehealth and the mail, regardless of local laws.
Louisiana responded to the eased restrictions on mifepristone—which is generally taken with another drug, misoprostol, for abortions—by suing, which led to the battle that has now reached the Supreme Court. Prior to Friday's decision by the infamously far-right 5th Circuit, a district judge in the state paused the case due to what the ACLU on Monday called "a sham FDA review announced by the Trump administration," which is ongoing.
"While this is a positive short-term development, no one can rest easy when our ability to get this safe, effective medication for abortion and miscarriage care still hangs in the balance," Julia Kaye, senior staff attorney for the ACLU's Reproductive Freedom Project, stressed Monday. "The Supreme Court needs to put an end to this baseless attack on our reproductive freedom, once and for all."
This article has been updated with comment from the National Abortion Federation.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Mifepristone Maker Appeals to US Supreme Court Amid Fears of 'National Abortion Ban'
"The safety of mifepristone has never actually been in question," said one advocate. "As this case moves towards the US Supreme Court, we will fight until every person has access to the care they need."
May 02, 2026
A pharmaceutical company which manufactures mifepristone filed an appeal to the US Supreme Court on Saturday asking for emergency relief from the "sweeping and dangerous" lower-court ruling Friday that would prohibit the mailing of the widely used abortion medication nationwide.
Danco Laboratories, which makes the popular drug and is part of ongoing litigation stemming from a legal challenge by the Republican-controlled state of Louisiana, said Friday's ruling by the Fifth Circuit of Appeals—a decision roundly condemned by reproductive rights advocates as an attack on women's health and the right to choose across the country—will cause "tremendous uncertainty" on the "legal status of mifepristone throughout the country” if it goes into effect.
The company further argued that the ruling as it stands leaves medical providers, patients, and pharmacies “all to guess at what is allowed and what is not," whether or not abortion is legal in the state where a patient is trying to obtain it.
The company asked the nation's highest court for an immediate administrative stay to the 5th Circuit's ruling while the challenge to the drug's availability makes its way through lower courts. It also urged the Court to take up the case itself prior to the upcoming summer recess.
According to Politico:
Even a temporary disruption of access to mifepristone will have massive implications. The medication is used in nearly two-thirds of all pregnancy terminations, and a quarter of patients depend on telehealth to obtain them. The ruling also cuts off telemedicine prescription of the drug for non-abortion purposes, such as easing miscarriages.
In the wake of Friday’s ruling, medical and progressive advocacy groups stressed that doctors can still use telehealth to prescribe the other abortion pill — misoprostol. The drug can be used on its own to end pregnancies and carries fewer restrictions because it is used for an array of other purposes, including treating ulcers and stopping hemorrhages.
Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward who also the legal effort to make mifepristone available by mail during the COVID-19 pandemic as then-Chief Legal Officer and General Counsel of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, issued the following statement
“Women’s ability to access mifepristone through the mail or from their pharmacy has revolutionized access to care. Now, as anti-abortion extremists seek to employ their anti-abortion playbook and reverse this hard-fought victory for patients, this decision needlessly blocks people around the country from critical healthcare, discriminating in particular against those who live in rural and other areas where healthcare is inaccessible.
"Here's what is very clear: mifepristone has an OUTSTANDING safety record," said the Center for Reproductive Rights on Saturday. "It has been FDA-approved for 25 years and used by more than 7 million people."
Following Friday night's ruling by the 5th Circuit, Mini Timmaraju, president and CEO of the advocacy group Reproductive Freedom for All, said the stakes could night be higher for the right to choose in the United States.
"The court’s decision moves us one step closer to a national abortion ban," Timmaraju warned.
"It is now much more difficult for people to access abortion care," she said. "Anti-abortion politicians know their policies are unpopular, so they are using every lever of government they can. Louisiana built this case on debunked, junk science. The safety of mifepristone has never actually been in question. As this case moves towards the US Supreme Court, we will fight until every person has access to the care they need."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Sweeping and Dangerous': US Appeals Court Blocks Mailing of Abortion Pills
The "politically driven" ruling, warned one campaigner, "overrides medical expertise and years of research, and threatens to upend how abortion care is delivered nationwide."
May 01, 2026
Rights advocates swiftly sounded the alarm on Friday after the infamously far-right US Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit temporarily blocked a federal rule allowing mifepristone to be dispensed by mail, dramatically curtailing access to the medication—commonly used for abortion and early miscarriage care—nationwide, particularly in states with policies hostile to reproductive freedom.
Just months after the US Supreme Court's right-wing supermajority reversed Roe v. Wade, the Food and Drug Administration permanently lifted mifepristone's in-person dispensing requirement in early 2023, under then-President Joe Biden. Louisiana—which has among the nation's most restrictive abortion policies—challenged the FDA's move.
A federal judge in Louisiana paused that lawsuit last month while President Donald Trump's administration conducts an FDA review that seems "designed to manufacture an excuse for further restricting medication abortion across the country," as Julia Kaye, senior staff attorney for the ACLU's Reproductive Freedom Project, warned at the time.
After a panel from the appellate court overturned that decision and revived the in-person dispensing rule on Friday, Kaye declared that "anti-abortion politicians have just made it much harder for people everywhere in the country to get a medication that abortion and miscarriage patients have been safely using for more than 25 years."
"Louisiana's legal attack on mifepristone shamelessly packaged lies and propaganda as an excuse to restrict abortion—and the 5th Circuit rubber-stamped it," she continued. "This decision defies clear science and settled law and advances an anti-abortion agenda that is deeply unpopular with the American people. For countless people, especially those who live in rural areas, face intimate partner violence, or live with disabilities, losing a telemedicine option will mean losing access to this vital medication altogether."
Brittany Fonteno, president and CEO of the National Abortion Federation (NAF), similarly stressed that "this ruling is a sweeping and dangerous rollback that disregards the well-established safety and efficacy of the use of mifepristone via telehealth, and will create immediate, medically unnecessary barriers to care for patients across the country."
"Make no mistake: This ruling is not grounded in science or patient safety," she said. "It is a politically driven decision that overrides medical expertise and years of research, and threatens to upend how abortion care is delivered nationwide. Through this litigation, Louisiana seeks to impose its cruel abortion ban across the nation—including in states with legal protections for abortion—and today the court has taken an extreme step toward that end."
While pledging that "NAF and our allies will continue to advocate to restore full access to medication abortion," Fonteno reminded patients that mifepristone "remains available in doctors' offices, clinics, and hospitals."
Terrific thread. I’ll just add:1. I think there’s a good chance the Supreme Court will stay this decision, allowing providers to keep mailing mifepristone for the time being.2. The Trump administration didn’t want this! Its plan was to wait until after the midterms to crack down on mifepristone.
[image or embed]
— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjsdc.bsky.social) May 1, 2026 at 6:52 PM
After Roe's reversal, the anti-choice movement and its allies in elected offices ramped up efforts to impose state-level restrictions on reproductive healthcare. A significant majority of abortions in the United States involve a two-drug regimen of mifepristone and misoprostol, and a quarter of those patients receive care via telemedicine.
"Telehealth has been the last bridge to care for many seeking abortion, which is precisely why Louisiana officials want it banned," said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, which joined over 100 other reproductive health, justice, and rights groups, including the ACLU and NAF, that filed an amicus brief in this case.
"This isn't about science—it's about making abortion as difficult, expensive, and unreachable as possible," Northup added. "Telehealth has transformed healthcare. Selectively stripping that away from abortion patients is a political blockade."
The drug companies Danco Laboratories, which makes the brand-name version of mifepristone, Mifeprex, and GenBioPro, which makes the generic, have intervened in Louisiana v. FDA. GenBioPro is represented by the law firm Arnold & Porter and Democracy Forward, whose president and CEO, Skye Perryman, declared Friday that "this is the anti-abortion extremists' playbook in action once again: Weaponize the courts to serve their political interests, ignore decades of scientific evidence proving mifepristone’s safety, and put women directly in harm's way."
"Even as this assault defies the will of the overwhelming majority of the American public, these ideologically extreme politicians and organizations are determined to impose a narrow, autocratic agenda—no matter the cost," she continued, emphasizing that "our fight is not over."
This is a ruling purporting to halt telehealth prescriptions of mifepristone NATIONWIDE. Louisiana asked the Fifth Circuit for a decision by Monday, May 11. That they dropped it on a Friday afternoon feels intentional to keep it in effect for longer. Expect emergency appeal to SCOTUS shadow docket
[image or embed]
— Susan Rinkunas (@susanrinkunas.com) May 1, 2026 at 5:35 PM
The effects of the 5th Circuit's decision are expected to be immediate absent a quick intervention from the Supreme Court, and Nourbese Flint, president of All* Above All, warned that "as always, the people most impacted will be Black and brown communities and those already navigating systemic barriers to care."
Serra Sippel, executive director of the Brigid Alliance, a national abortion support group that helps coordinate and fund travel, said that "we expect to see an immediate increase in patients forced to travel hundreds or even thousands of miles for care. That includes many who are later in pregnancy—when care is more complex and more expensive."
"Over the past several years, we've seen a dramatic rise in abortion travel and a growing reliance on practical support networks like ours, particularly in states where patients already travel long distances for care," Sippel noted. "We will continue to monitor the impact of this ruling and are committed to ensuring abortion patients who need to travel can safely get to the care they need, regardless of where they live."
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy