A recent study by the Society of Family Planning revealed that approximately 8,000 women per month receive abortion pills via mail in states where abortion is heavily restricted. The report is the first of its kind to fully document the impact of providers leveraging blue state shield laws to offer telehealth abortions.
However, despite the implementation of shield laws in numerous states that safeguard providers who prescribe abortion pills from criminalization, the Supreme Court is poised to threaten the accessibility of abortion pills for women residing in states where abortion is prohibited.
“Access to medication abortion through telehealth continues to play an ever-increasing role in abortion care nationwide — even as the Supreme Court weighs the fate of telehealth abortion care,” Ushma Upadhyay, a professor at the University of California, San Francisco, told The Hill.
On March 26, 2024, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. FDA, a case which could endanger people’s access to the abortion pill mifepristone. While the Supreme Court has allowed mifepristone to remain on the market while the case moves through the courts, the Court could uphold a 5th Circuit holding that reimposed pre-2016 limitations on the medication by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), such as prohibiting its prescription via telemedicine and dispensation via mail. This would have a detrimental effect on abortion access, as research shows that the abortion pill is currently used in more than half of all abortions.
“If the Court affirms [the Fifth Circuit Court’s ruling], the upshot will be harm all around: harm to women, particularly rural and low-income women, who will be required to visit in-person clinics simply to take a prescription medication, or may not be able to access mifepristone for abortion or miscarriage management at all,” the Reproductive Freedom Alliance, a coalition of 22 governors who support protecting abortion rights, said in a brief to the Court.
If the Court allows the prohibition of the abortion pill’s prescription via telemedicine and dispensation via mail, Black women in states with abortion bans would be disproportionately affected. Research shows that Black people seek abortion care more frequently, face reduced access to family planning services, and suffer from inferior health, education, and economic outcomes as a consequence. In fact, a recent report by the National Partnership for Women & Families and In Our Own Voice found that 57 percent of Black women of reproductive age, or 7 million, reside in states with existing or proposed abortion restrictions.
Some states are even considering bills that would criminalize possessing the abortion pill, such as Louisiana. This bill would classify mifepristone as a controlled substance and make it a crime for anyone who doesn’t have a prescription or is a licensed provider to possess the abortion pill. This bill not only increases the likelihood of Black women facing pregnancy criminalization but also could worsen the ongoing “medical ethics crisis” in Louisiana due to its stringent abortion ban, which disproportionately impacts Black women.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.