“Attacks on mifepristone are not about safety—they are part of an anti-science, autocratic playbook that is unfolding across the nation that threatens people, families and communities,” said Democracy Forward president Skye Perryman.
The attorneys general of Louisiana, Idaho and Missouri filed a lawsuit in October 2025 in a Louisiana federal court, seeking to overturn the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s 2023 decision to allow telehealth abortion. Represented by the antiabortion juggernaut (and ironically named) Alliance Defending Freedom, the Republican attorneys general inaccurately claimed the FDA had ignored the safety risks of easing access to mifepristone.
The lawsuit, Louisiana et al v. FDA, seeks to restore an outdated in-person dispensing requirement for mifepristone, used as part of a two-pill regimen for medication abortion, and block access to mifepristone through pharmacies and mail. The states have asked U.S. District Judge David Joseph, a Trump appointee, to issue a preliminary injunction blocking telehealth abortion and pharmacy dispensing of mifepristone while he weighs the merits of the case.
In the first half of 2025, 27 percent of all abortions within the U.S. healthcare system were provided via telehealth. Telehealth abortion from out of states is a critical avenue of access for women living in states that restrict abortion providers located inside the states from providing abortion services.
With telehealth abortion access on the line, mifepristone’s manufacturers are moving to join the lawsuit and defend access to medication abortion.
On Feb. 3, Danco Laboratories and GenBioPro—manufacturers of the brand-name and a generic of mifepristone—filed motions to intervene, opposing Louisiana’s request for a preliminary injunction and urging the court to dismiss the lawsuit. The drugmakers argue that mifepristone has a long-established safety record—proven safe beyond any doubt by over 100 peer-reviewed studies and 25 years of real-world use by more than 7.5 million women.
GenBioPro explained its reasons for filing the motion. “We are increasingly concerned by extremists’ complete disregard for the large body of scientific evidence supporting mifepristone’s use and safety,” said GenBioPro CEO Evan Masingill. “We will not stand by while politically motivated efforts put Americans’ access to medication abortion in jeopardy.”
GenBioPro is represented by Democracy Forward Foundation and Arnold & Porter, who warned about the dangers of this attack on the FDA’s authority to make decisions based on science.
“Attacks on mifepristone are not about safety—they are part of an anti-science, autocratic playbook that is unfolding across the nation that threatens people, families and communities,” said Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward. “In this matter, it isn’t just mifepristone—which has a decades-long demonstrated safety profile—that is being threatened in pursuit of ideology and unbridled power, it is also our nation’s science-based drug approval system.”
The Journal of the American Medical Association published a report last month that undercuts the states’ safety narrative, finding that the FDA’s review of mifepristone between 2011 and 2023 has been solely shaped by scientific evidence. The report concluded that “FDA oversight of mifepristone, developed during key moments from 2011 to 2023, has been shaped by scientific evidence and a cautious regulatory approach led by scientists at the agency.”
Daphne O’Connor of Arnold & Porter dismissed Louisiana’s arguments as “meritless,” pointing to the FDA’s scientific record. “The regulatory determinations by the FDA that the State of Louisiana is challenging in this politically motivated lawsuit are sound, well-supported by the science, and lawful in every respect” said O’Connor.
… Ideologically extreme organizations have repeatedly tried to weaponize our courts to strip people of essential healthcare.
Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward
The Louisiana lawsuit is one of three currently active lawsuits filed by state attorneys general pushing the FDA to roll back access to mifepristone.
In a separate attack on mifepristone, Missouri, Kansas and Idaho have filed a lawsuit in a Missouri federal court, challenging the FDA’s original approval of the medication in 2000.
Florida and Texas have also joined the push, suing the FDA in a Texas federal court with a similar challenge.
These lawsuits reflect a backlash by antiabortion politicians against telehealth abortion, as women in their states have been able to obtain abortions via telehealth from clinicians in states with provider shield laws. At least eight states have enacted shield laws that protect clinicians within their borders who provide telehealth abortion to people across all 50 states. Currently, approximately 15,000 people in states with abortion bans and severe restrictions obtain abortion pills via telehealth each month. Despite the wave of post-Dobbs bans, abortion rates have risen.
In a parallel move, the FDA has launched a “safety review” of mifepristone, prompted by a politically biased, six-page, non-peer-reviewed report released by an antiabortion group. But the review was reportedly delayed until after the November 2026 mid-term elections. Then late last month, the Trump administration urged the Louisiana court to pause the mifepristone lawsuit pending completion of the FDA’s review, triggering outrage from antiabortion activists seeking an immediate ruling to block telehealth abortion.
The next hearing in the Louisiana et al. v FDA case is set for Feb. 24, 2026, when Judge David Joseph will hear arguments on Louisiana’s preliminary injunction motion to block telehealth abortion and pharmacy dispensing of mifepristone.
When the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court said the power to regulate abortion would lie in the states, yet this case is about a handful of conservative states trying to ban telehealth abortion nationwide, including in states that currently allow it, by forcing the FDA to change its science-based approach to mifepristone.
“The overwhelming majority of Americans support the legal right to abortion and understand that healthcare decisions should be made by people, not politicians,” said Perryman. “Yet, ideologically extreme organizations have repeatedly tried to weaponize our courts to strip people of essential healthcare and put all Americans in harm’s way.”
Great Job Carrie N. Baker & the Team @ Ms. Magazine for sharing this story.
