Federal Court To Hear Arguments in Louisiana’s Effort To Stop Telehealth Providers From Dispensing Abortion Pills

A federal appeals court is scheduled to hear oral arguments in a case that could have major ramifications for women seeking to obtain abortion pills via telehealth consultations. On Wednesday, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit will hear arguments in Louisiana’s lawsuit against the Food and Drug Administration that seeks to reinstate an old rule that required that abortion pills be dispensed in person. When the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, anti-abortion activists were hopeful that state-level restrictions would lead to a decrease in the number of abortions each year. However, a group that advocates for abortion access, the Guttmacher Institute, estimated that in 2025, there were 1,126,000 abortion. Anti-abortion activists have pointed to a 2023 rule change by the Food and Drug Administration that allowed women to get abortion pills via telehealth consultation, and have the pills mailed to them. Louisiana and other conservative states have struggled to prevent abortion pills from being mailed to women who live in jurisdictions where the procedure is restricted. Last year, the Pelican State sued the FDA, arguing that the 2023 rule change was done for “avowedly political reasons.” The lawsuit argues that the rule change violates Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which overturned Roe, by allowing for the shipment of abortion medications to states where the procedure is restricted. The Guttmacher Institute estimates that in 2025, more than 9,300 abortion pills were shipped to Louisiana. In May, the Fifth Circuit sided with Louisiana and blocked the FDA rule that let women obtain abortion pills via telehealth appointments. However, the U.S. Supreme Court stayed that ruling while the case plays out. The Trump Administration asked the court to hold off on a decision in the case until the FDA completes its safety review of mifepristone. And the FDA has tried to get the case dismissed, arguing that Louisiana does not have standing. While the Trump Administration’s response to the litigation has irked anti-abortion activists, Planned Parenthood argues the requests are not a genuine attempt to preserve abortion access. In a statement in January, the president of the Planned Parent Action Fund, Alexis McGill Johnson, said the request to pause the lawsuit is a “smokescreen to delay changes to mifepristone’s approval until it is more politically convenient for this administration.”The president of the Family Research Council, Tony Perkins, who supports Louisiana’s lawsuit, wrote on X that the case “could restore the in-person dispensing requirement for the abortion pill mifepristone, saving babies and protecting women.”“We’ve seen that unfettered access to abortion pills through the mail allows women to be coerced into taking the medication, poisoned without their knowledge, or to use the drug beyond the recommended gestational limit,” he said. The ACLU, which opposes Louisiana’s lawsuit, said in a statement that the lawsuit “could have far-reaching implications for telemedicine and medical research generally.”“Accessible telemedicine, for a vast array of medical care, is now routine — and every bit as good, if not better, for patients. A telehealth restriction on mifepristone would undermine patients’ autonomy and ability to get care they might not otherwise receive,” the ACLU insisted. The civil liberties organization also claimed that reinstating the restrictions on how patients can access mifepristone “needlessly jeopardizes the health and lives of [intimate partner violence] survivors, who often must navigate surveillance or control by their partners that can make it dangerous or impossible to get in-person care.”The FDA did not respond to The New York Sun’s request for comment by the time of publication. Louisiana’s lawsuit is not the only case pending involving the accessibility of abortion pills. Texas and Florida are suing the FDA in a bid to force the agency to revoke its approval of mifepristone. However, last month a federal judge in Texas put that case on pause until December 1 or until the FDA finishes its safety review of mifepristone.

Federal Court To Hear Arguments in Louisiana’s Effort To Stop Telehealth Providers From Dispensing Abortion Pills

Federal Court To Hear Arguments in Louisiana’s Effort To Stop Telehealth Providers From Dispensing Abortion Pills

More from the New York Sun

‘Beyond Irresponsible’: Republicans on Capitol Hill Denounce Trump’s Decision To Waive Russia Sanctions

Out of Adversity, a Japanese American Design Vision

The Tesla Roadster Can Really Fly, But It’s Not a Real Car Yet

Blakeman Hopes To Cut a Path to Albany Through Minority and Jewish Voters, and Hochul’s Unpopular Policies

With 20,000 Names Struck From Michigan’s Sex Offender List, Victim Rights Advocates Wonder What Good It Is

Sam Bankman-Fried Protected by Magna Carta From Being Fined Billions, a New Brief Argues to Supreme Court

A $45 Million Gift Leaves Malala Fund Flush but Critics Question Where the Money Goes

Police Shoot 10,000 Dogs a Year; Whether Anyone is Held Accountable Depends on the State

More from the New York Sun

‘Beyond Irresponsible’: Republicans on Capitol Hill Denounce Trump’s Decision To Waive Russia Sanctions

Out of Adversity, a Japanese American Design Vision

The Tesla Roadster Can Really Fly, But It’s Not a Real Car Yet

Blakeman Hopes To Cut a Path to Albany Through Minority and Jewish Voters, and Hochul’s Unpopular Policies

With 20,000 Names Struck From Michigan’s Sex Offender List, Victim Rights Advocates Wonder What Good It Is

Sam Bankman-Fried Protected by Magna Carta From Being Fined Billions, a New Brief Argues to Supreme Court

A $45 Million Gift Leaves Malala Fund Flush but Critics Question Where the Money Goes

Police Shoot 10,000 Dogs a Year; Whether Anyone is Held Accountable Depends on the State