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
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
When it Comes to Women’s Health, The Trump Admin’s Hypocrisy is on Full Display
President Donald Trump and his cronies are peddling lies about abortion care while touting their farce advancements for women’s health.
Nov 22, 2025
Earlier this month, Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Marty Makary and Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. made an announcement regarding the removal of broad “black box” warnings from Hormone Replacement Therapy products for menopause.
As an OB-GYN PA with more than a decade of experience in reproductive care, I know what decisions women and patients are grappling with when it comes to their health and maternal care. I also know first hand the devastating consequences of denying patients critical care when they need it the most and stripping access to care that’s been proven to be safe and effective after decades of research.
President Donald Trump and his cronies are peddling lies about abortion care while being hypocrites when touting their farce advancements for women’s health. Right now, Trump and his anti-abortion administration are pulling every string possible to ban abortion and that includes banning abortion medication.
Ironically, Commissioner Makary said in a statement that “women and their physicians should make decisions based on data, not fear,” and anti-abortion extremist Kennedy Jr. said that the administration is “returning to evidence-based medicine and giving women control over their health again.”
Contrary to their assertion of trusting research and doctors, right now, the Trump administration is working to roll back access to mifepristone and reproductive care, with Makary and Kennedy Jr. at the helm.
At the press event for this announcement, while responding to a question from a reporter, Makary said that the administration is “sticking with our philosophy that the government is not your doctor.”
So, which is it? Does this administration trust women and patients to consult their physicians for what’s best on making personal medical decisions, or is that only convenient messaging when it’s pushing forward their extreme agenda?
The healthcare crisis in America is a dire one, and yet, the Trump administration continues to play political games and feign ignorance as to how their efforts to ban abortion nationwide will have a catastrophic impact on women and patients across the country.
It has been 25 years since the FDA approved mifepristone, a safe, effective medication that has reshaped abortion care in the US.
Contrary to their assertion of trusting research and doctors, right now, the Trump administration is working to roll back access to mifepristone and reproductive care, with Makary and Kennedy Jr. at the helm.
At the urging of anti-abortion politicians and junk science, the FDA has agreed to revisit its approval of mifepristone, because extremists condemned the FDA approving a generic abortion pill just last month.
We must continue to call out this hypocrisy, because Republicans know that imposing Project 2025’s abortion agenda risks significant political backlash, particularly in battleground states where abortion is either legal or popular. More than 6 in 10 Americans support keeping medication abortion available. Even many Trump voters oppose new restrictions.
Let’s be clear—this administration’s attacks on mifepristone are a national abortion test.
Project 2025, spearheaded by Trump, Kennedy Jr., and Makary, would dismantle access to one of the safest, most widely used medications in the country. Medication abortion accounted for nearly two-thirds of all US abortions in 2023.
Will women and families retain the ability to make private medical decisions—or will patients have their rights ripped away and be forced to jump through unimaginable hoops just to receive care?
If Republicans were actually committed to prioritizing women’s health in their agenda, they would invest in healthcare so expecting mothers across the country have access to the most comprehensive care available, including abortion care.
If Republicans were actually committed to protecting women and advancing medical research, they wouldn’t pull funding from clinics and hospitals dedicated to providing care for women and patients nationwide, especially in rural communities where resources are already sparse.
I’m not buying this feigned effort toward showing allyship toward women, when everything that this administration has done since January has been an assault on women’s health and the care we undoubtedly need. Physicians and providers like me spend years in schooling and training so we can provide the best care to our communities, and yet this administration undermines those years of dedication and expertise to appease an extreme anti-abortion minority.
If Trump, Makary, and Kennedy Jr. want to walk the walk in advancing women’s healthcare, they should start with looking at themselves and acknowledging the harm that they are doing across the country to the detriment of the American people.
Lives are at stake, and we are waiting for them to mean what they say.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Texas House Passes Attack on Mailed Abortion Pills That 'Will Fuel Fear' Nationwide
"Texas: Land of the free! Also Texas: We want you to surveil your neighbor, see if they've missed their period, snoop through their trash and mail, and sue whoever sent them medication abortion."
Aug 29, 2025
Republicans in the Texas House of Representatives on Thursday night advanced another anti-abortion bounty hunter bill, this one taking aim at medications mailed from states that support reproductive freedom so Texans can choose to end pregnancies.
House Bill 7 passed 82-48 along party lines during Texas' second special legislative session of the year. The proposal from state Rep. Jeff Leach (R-67) still needs approval from the Senate—which previously passed similar legislation—before it heads to the desk of Republican Gov. Greg Abbott. He has signed various attacks on reproductive rights, including Senate Bill 8, a 2021 state law that entices vigilantes with $10,000 bounties to enforce a six-week abortion ban.
Like S.B. 8, the new bill relies on lawsuits filed by private citizens. H.B. 7 would empower them to sue out-of-state healthcare providers, medication manufacturers, and anyone who mails or otherwise provides abortion pills to someone in the state for up to $100,000 in damages per violation—even if no abortion occurs. Under pressure from some anti-choice groups, Republicans added language allowing vigilantes to keep only $10,000; the rest would go to a charity they choose.
"It's designed to trap Texans into forced pregnancy," Shellie Hayes-McMahon, executive director of Planned Parenthood Texas Votes, told the Houston Chronicle. "Instead of fixing the crisis they (Texas lawmakers) manufactured, they're doubling down to punish anyone who dares to help a Texan. This bill is not about safety, it's about control."
Republicans in the Texas House have introduced another way to try to harm patients, providers, and manufacturers in the state. HB 7 would allow anyone to sue a manufacturer, distributor, or provider of medication abortion—even without proof of care being provided.
[image or embed]
— Reproductive Freedom for All (@reproductivefreedomforall.org) August 29, 2025 at 10:34 AM
The bill is part of a broader effort to stop the flow of abortion medications—mifepristone and misoprostol—into states that have ramped up restrictions in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's right-wing supermajority reversing Roe v. Wade in 2022.
As GOP lawmakers have worked to further restrict reproductive freedom, Democrat-controlled states have enacted "shield laws" to protect doctors and patients. Laws enabling telehealth abortions are key targets for Republican officials and far-right activists—including "anti-abortion legal terrorist" Jonathan Mitchell, the chief architect of S.B. 8 who's now representing a Texas man in a wrongful death case against a California doctor accused of providing pills that his girlfriend used to end her pregnancy.
The New York Times reported that "supporters hope and opponents fear" H.B. 7 "will serve as a model for other states to limit medication abortion by promoting a rash of lawsuits against medical providers, pharmaceutical companies, and companies such as FedEx or UPS that may ship the drugs."
Supporters and opponents also anticipate court battles over the bill itself. "Texas is sort of the tip of the spear," Marc Hearron, the associate director of litigation at the Center for Reproductive Rights, told the Times. "It's setting up a clash."
H.B. 7 is "pushing up against the limits of how much a state can control," Hearron added. "Each state can have its own laws, but throughout our history, we have been able to travel across the country, send things across the country."
Texas: Land of the free! Also Texas: We want you to surveil your neighbor, see if they've missed their period, snoop through their trash and mail, and sue whoever sent them medication abortion. https://bit.ly/4lM2sXF
[image or embed]
— Center for Reproductive Rights (@reprorights.org) August 28, 2025 at 4:45 PM
After Thursday's vote, Blair Wallace, policy and advocacy strategist on reproductive freedom at the ACLU of Texas, warned in a statement that "H.B. 7 exports Texas' extreme abortion ban far beyond state borders."
"It will fuel fear among manufacturers and providers nationwide, while encouraging neighbors to police one another's reproductive lives, further isolating pregnant Texans, and punishing the people who care for them," she said. "We believe in a Texas where people have the freedom to make decisions about our own bodies and futures."
Keep ReadingShow Less
GOP AGs Urge Congress to Crack Down on Shield Laws and Telehealth Abortions
The Republican coalition targeted California and New York, both home to doctors who have been targeted by legal cases for allegedly providing abortion pills to patients in states with strict bans.
Jul 30, 2025
While a recently filed lawsuit in Texas jeopardizes the future of telehealth abortions, some Republican state attorneys general don't want the GOP-controlled Congress to wait for the results of that case, and this week urged leaders on Capitol Hill to consider passing federal legislation that would restrict doctors from shipping pills to patients to end their pregnancies.
Since the U.S. Supreme Court's right-wing majority ended nationwide abortion rights with Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization three years ago, anti-choice state lawmakers have ramped up efforts to restrict reproductive freedom. At the same time, some Democratic officials have enacted "shield laws" to protect in-state providers and traveling patients.
Led by Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin, 16 state AGs on Tuesday wrote to top congressional leaders from both parties, calling on them to "assess the constitutional authority it may have to preempt shield laws."
Griffin also sent cease-and-desist letters to two entities shipping abortion medication within the United States and two website companies that provide services to LifeOnEasyPills.org. Reporting on the AG's press conference, South Carolina Daily Gazette noted that "if the entities don't cease advertising abortion pills in Arkansas, Griffin said his office may bring a lawsuit against them for violating the state's deceptive trade practices law."
While Griffin also "said he believes what he is asking lawmakers to do is different from a federal abortion ban that the closely divided Congress has seemed hesitant to tackle," according to the Daily Gazette, advocates for reproductive rights disagreed.
Responding to the letter to Congress on social media, the advocacy group Reproductive Freedom for All shared a petition opposing a national abortion ban. It says that Republican President Donald Trump "has proven time and time again that he is out of touch with the 8 in 10 Americans who support protecting abortion rights."
"On the campaign trail he spewed whatever lies he could to get him reelected. Now he'll use the Project 2025 playbook to further restrict our right to access abortion, contraception, fertility treatments, and more," the petition warns. "We must stop him."
Yesterday, 16 Republican attorneys general sent a letter to congressional leadership urging them to override state telemedicine abortion shield laws.Sign the petition below to stand up to Republican lawmakers!act.reproductivefreedomforall.org/a/no-nationa...
[image or embed]
— Reproductive Freedom for All (@reproductivefreedomforall.org) July 30, 2025 at 3:48 PM
In addition to Griffin, the Tuesday letter is signed by the attorneys general of Alabama, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, West Virginia, and Wyoming.
The GOP coalition targeted two states, arguing that "when New York or California refuses to respect a criminal prosecution or a civil judgment against an individual who is accused of violating the abortion laws of another state, they are refusing to give full faith and credit to that state's judicial proceedings."
Last December, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced a first-of-its-kind lawsuit against a provider in New York. He sued Dr. Margaret Daley Carpenter, co-founder of the Abortion Coalition for Telemedicine (ACT), for providing two drugs used in medication abortions—mifepristone and misoprostol—to a 20-year-old resident of Collin County.
In February, on the same day that Texas State District Judge Bryan Gantt ordered Carpenter to pay over $100,000 in fines and fees, Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill sought to extradite the ACT doctor. Her state classifies mifepristone and misoprostol as dangerous controlled substances.
While Republican Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry signed the extradition warrant sought by Murrill and the district attorney, New York is one of nearly two dozen states with shield laws for reproductive healthcare, and its Democratic governor, Kathy Hochul, said that "I will not be signing an extradition order that came from the governor of Louisiana—not now, not ever."
On Monday, Paxton took legal action against Taylor Brucka, the clerk in Ulster County, New York, for refusing to make Carpenter pay the $100,000 penalty. Bruck told The Guardian that "it's really unprecedented for a clerk to be in this position" and "I'm just proud to live in a state that has something like the shield law here to protect our healthcare providers from out-of-state proceedings like this."
Meanwhile, another case involving a California doctor emerged in Texas earlier this month: A man filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Dr. Rémy Coeytaux for allegedly mailing to Galveston County medication that his girlfriend used to end her pregnancy. His lawyer is Jonathan Mitchell, an "anti-abortion legal terrorist" who previously served as the state's solicitor general and was the chief architect of its law that entices anti-choice vigilantes with $10,000 bounties to enforce a six-week ban.
Mary Ziegler, an abortion historian and law professor at the University of California, Davis, recently told Mother Jones that "the whole game for Jonathan Mitchell is to get into federal court... both because he wants to shut down doctors in shield law states, like everyone in the anti-abortion movement, and because he wants a federal court to weigh in on the Comstock Act," a dormant 1873 law that criminalized the shipping of "obscene" materials, including abortifacients.
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