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
shield laws
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
Alarm as 'Legal Terrorist' Helps Texan Sue Dr. Over Girlfriend's Abortion Pills
The high-profile lawyer behind the case "wants to shut down doctors in shield law states," said one expert, and "he wants a federal court to weigh in on the Comstock Act."
Jul 24, 2025
As polling reaffirms U.S. public support for abortion rights, a new case in Texas is generating alarm and outrage, as it involves a federal "zombie law" that the forced birth movement aims to use to block people across the country from accessing abortion pills.
Jonathan Mitchell is serving as lead counsel in the proposed class action lawsuit, filed Sunday in the Southern District of Texas. Described as an "anti-abortion legal terrorist" by Susan Rinkunas in Jezebel, Mitchell is Texas' former solicitor general and the chief architect of a state law that entices anti-choice vigilantes with $10,000 bounties to enforce a six-week abortion ban.
"He's represented at least three other men who've sued over women's abortions—including Marcus Silva, who sued his ex-wife's friends for helping her get abortion pills. That case was eventually dropped, but not before it came out that Silva tried to use the lawsuit to blackmail his ex into having sex with him," Jessica Valenti noted in her Abortion, Everyday newsletter. "Since then, Mitchell and other anti-abortion activists have been cozying up to men's rights groups, 'abortion recovery' ministries, and crisis pregnancy centers—on the lookout for more angry men eager to sue their partners or exes for ending a pregnancy."
In the new wrongful death case in Texas, Mitchell represents Jerry Rodriguez, who is suing Rémy Coeytaux, a California doctor accused of mailing to Galveston County medication that his girlfriend used to end her pregnancy last September. The complaint claims the girlfriend's estranged husband and mother "pressured her to kill the baby with the drugs obtained from Coeytaux."
The complaint also claims the girlfriend ended a second pregnancy with "pills that were illegally obtained" in January—and she is now two months into a third pregnancy, and Rodriguez believes she may seek another medication abortion. He asked for $75,000 in damages and "an injunction to stop Coeytaux from distributing abortion-inducing drugs in violation of state or federal law."
The new "wrongful death" abortion pill lawsuit out of Texas is a BFD for several reasons, but one twist is that the doctor being targeted is the brother of lifelong reproductive health advocate Francine Coeytaux of @plancpills.bsky.social Collab by Nina Martin & me on what the case is all about:
[image or embed]
— Madison Pauly (@msjpauly.bsky.social) July 23, 2025 at 5:25 PM
Among the legislation cited in the filing is the Comstock Act, or 18 U.S. Code § 1461, a dormant 1873 law that criminalized the shipping of "obscene" materials, including abortifacients. While some anti-choice advocates aim to outlaw abortion nationwide with legislation in Congress, Mitchell has said that "we don't need a federal ban when we have Comstock on the books."
Since the U.S. Supreme Court's right-wing majority reversed Roe v. Wade with Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization in 2022, Republican lawmakers have ramped up their efforts to restrict abortion rights within their states—with deadly consequences. Residents of those parts of the country have increasingly turned to telehealth. States with pro-choice policymakers have enacted "shield laws" to protect abortion providers and patients who are traveling or receiving care online.
"These anti-abortion folks are really upset that all these pills are being sent to their states, and they're doing whatever they can to try to stop it," Jill Wieber Lens, a University of Iowa College of Law professor and reproductive rights expert, told Jezebel.
Lens also framed the Texas case as a fear tactic. "I think so much of this is about the chilling effect, as opposed to actually winning this lawsuit," she said. "This might scare other doctors in shield states from wanting to continue what they're doing."
According to Mother Jones, "The case is the first known test of whether abortion opponents can use federal court lawsuits to circumvent state shield laws aimed at protecting providers—a major escalation of attacks on abortion-friendly states."
Mary Ziegler, an abortion historian and law professor at the University of California, Davis, told the outlet 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."
Ziegler added on social media that the suit is also intended to "force a response" from the U.S. Supreme Court and President Donald Trump, who has so far resisted pressure from forced birth activists to use the Comstock Act to ban abortion nationwide. Further, she said, "it reinforces arguments for fetal personhood (note that is a class action on behalf of all 'fathers of unborn children')."
Three years after the fall of Roe v. Wade, most Americans still support legal abortion.-64% say abortion should be legal in all or most cases.-80%+ support it in cases of rape, incest, or health risks.-Even after Dobbs, public opinion hasn’t budged; the people are not with the ban.
[image or embed]
— Anna DNP, FNP, BC@ AccessToCareAdvocate (@anna1900.bsky.social) July 24, 2025 at 7:33 AM
The case comes as Thursday polling from the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research shows that 64% of U.S. adults across the political spectrum say that abortion should be legal in all or most cases.
While 52% of all respondents agreed abortion should be allowed if the patient does not want to be pregnant "for any reason," large majorities believe it should be allowed if the pregnant person's health is seriously endangered (89%), the pregnancy is a result of rape or incest (86%), and an abnormality would prevent the fetus from surviving outside of the womb (85%).
Additionally, according to the poll, a majority of Americans support protecting abortion access for people who endure miscarriages or other pregnancy-related emergencies (69%), protecting a patient's right to obtain care in another state (56%), and protecting doctors from fines or prison time (55%).
Keep ReadingShow Less
Attacks on Shield Laws Ramp Up as NY Doctor Fined $100,000 for Providing Abortion in Texas
The Louisiana attorney general also tried to extradite the physician for sending medication abortion pills to a patient in the state.
Feb 14, 2025
Republican-controlled states' testing of abortion rights "shield laws" that have been passed in eight states in recent years ramped up on Thursday as a judge in Texas ordered a New York doctor to pay more than $100,000 in fines and fees for prescribing medication abortion pills to a 20-year-old woman in the Dallas area last year.
On the same day, the physician, Dr. Margaret Daley Carpenter of the Abortion Coalition for Telemedicine (ACT), was subject to a demand for extradition to Louisiana after a state grand jury last month indicted her for mailing misoprostol and mifepristone, pills that are used in a majority of abortions in the U.S., to the state.
The charges in Louisiana are the first criminal charges filed against an abortion provider in a state with a shield law, which bar officials and agencies from cooperating with lawsuits and prosecutions against healthcare professionals who send abortion pills to patients in states that ban abortion care. The laws have been passed as advocates in states where abortion care remains legal fight to ensure Americans across the country can still obtain care after the U.S. Supreme Court's overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton did not file criminal charges against Carpenter, but accused her in a lawsuit of violating the state's near-total abortion ban by providing the medication to a resident through the mail.
In the country's first ruling on a case involving a shield law, State District Judge Bryan Gantt ordered Carpenter to pay $100,000 in fines and $13,000 in attorneys' and other fees. He also ruled that Carpenter, who did not attend Thursday's court proceedings, "is permanently enjoined from prescribing abortion-inducing drugs to Texas residents."
Violating the ruling could result in a jail sentence for Carpenter.
Despite the ruling, ACT executive director Julie Kay told The Associated Press on Thursday that "patients can access medication abortion from licensed providers no matter where they live."
"ACT has and continues to stand behind New York and other shield laws across the country that enable the distribution of safe and effective telemedicine abortion care."
In December, ACT said medication abortion pills, which have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration since 2000 and have "been proven safe and effective globally for decades," are "an essential part of women's healthcare."
The Texas case is expected to eventually reach the U.S. Supreme Court, where the right-wing majority could rule against legal protections for abortion providers who provide telemedicine for out-of-state patients—even as Republicans including President Donald Trump claim they believe abortion law should be left up to the states.
In Louisiana, Carpenter was indicted for allegedly violating the state's near-total abortion ban by sending pills for a girl who reportedly then experienced a medical emergency. The patient's mother has also been charged. If convicted, Carpenter could face up to 15 years in prison.
Republican state Attorney General Jeff Landry demanded her extradition to Louisiana, but New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, said Thursday that she "will not be signing an extradition order that came from the governor of Louisiana. Not now, not ever."
ACT said Thursday that "ongoing attempts by anti-abortion state officials to restrict access to abortion care are inconsistent with New York state law."
"ACT has and continues to stand behind New York and other shield laws across the country that enable the distribution of safe and effective telemedicine abortion care," said the group.
The Texas case also reflects a dynamic that could lead to new prosecutions against abortion providers: those resulting from legal challenges filed by men whose partners receive abortion care.
In the case of the 20-year-old Texas resident, the patient was taken to a hospital in July by a man identified in legal filings as the "biological father of her unborn child."
After the man "started to suspect" the patient had used abortion pills and found the medications that had been prescribed by Carpenter and ACT, he "filed a complaint with the Texas attorney general's office."
The New York Times reported that with Texas Right to Life, several men plan to file wrongful death lawsuits in the coming weeks against doctors and others who assisted their female partners in obtaining abortion care.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular