Louisiana’s Fight Against Telehealth Medication Abortion, So Far

March 10, 2026:

Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill’s lawsuit against the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which attempts to restrict access to mifepristone—one of two drugs commonly used in U.S. medication abortions—is heating up.

The case, filed in 2025, centers around a Biden-era rule that removed a requirement for abortion patients to receive mifepristone from a provider in-person and allowed certified retail pharmacies to dispense the drug directly to patients. The requirement was temporarily lifted during the COVID-19 pandemic and was officially codified in 2023, citing a scientific review by agency staff. This was just months after the Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision, which stripped federal abortion protections and led many states to impose abortion bans, increasing the use of telehealth abortion care.

In her complaint, Murrill argued that the FDA’s rule flies in the face of the state’s near-total abortion ban, since providers in other states can mail abortion pills to patients in Louisiana. Missouri, Idaho, Texas, Kansas, and Florida have also sued over the rule.

The case, Louisiana v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, has the potential to completely alter the state of telehealth medication abortion care, which accounts for nearly 27 percent of all abortions, according to the health policy research organization KFF.

Together, we make reproductive justice visible.

Rewire News Group is a reader-supported, independent nonprofit newsroom. Membership keeps this reporting accessible to all.

If Louisiana prevails, it would make abortion access even more difficult—researchers found that 84 percent of online prescriptions from Aid Access, a nonprofit that dispenses abortion pills to people in all 50 states who are less than 14 weeks pregnant, went to patients residing in states that ban abortion.

Here’s a breakdown of the key moments so far in the case.

Timeline of Louisiana v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration

Oct. 6, 2025

Murrill sued the FDA in an attempt to reverse a 2023 rule that allowed mifepristone to be dispensed remotely, via telehealth.

(Read more: Louisiana Mifepristone Lawsuit Could Hinder Telehealth Abortion Nationwide)

Dec. 17, 2025

Murrill asked a federal district court in Louisiana for a preliminary injunction to temporarily reinstate pre-2023 rules requiring in-person provision of mifepristone while the case proceeds.

Jan. 27, 2026

The FDA asked the court to stay, or pause, the case, saying it was actively reviewing its rules around mifepristone. The Trump administration’s brief argued that granting Louisiana’s request to re-implement pre-2023 rules would “threaten to short circuit the agency’s orderly review and study of the safety risks of mifepristone,” and that it “may prove as unnecessary as it is disruptive, if FDA ultimately decides that the in-person dispensing requirement must be restored.”

Feb. 3, 2026

GenBioPro—a pharmaceutical company that makes a generic version of mifepristone—and Danco Laboratories, which sells the drug under the brand name Mifeprex, filed motions to intervene in the case and asked the court to dismiss it altogether. “We are increasingly concerned by extremists’ complete disregard for the large body of scientific evidence supporting mifepristone’s use and safety,” GenBioPro CEO Evan Masingill said in a statement the following day.

Feb. 24, 2026

During a hearing, the court allowed GenBioPro and Danco to intervene in the case. The court did not rule on Louisiana’s request to enforce pre-2023 rules while the case proceeds.

(Listen: What’s Going On In the Fight Over Abortion Pills–Podcast)

This case continues in the courts. RNG will update this timeline as it proceeds.

Source link

tags

Abkhazia Afghanistan Africa Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Brunei Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Central African Republic Chad Chile China Colombia Comoros Costa Rica Croatia Cuba Curacao Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic East Timor Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Eswatini Ethiopia Fiji Finland France French Polynesia Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Grenada Guam Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Laos Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macau Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Micronesia Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria North Korea North Macedonia Northern Cyprus Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Palestine Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Republic of the Congo Romania Russia Rwanda Saint Lucia Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Korea South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Togo Tonga Transnistria Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Tuvalu Uganda UK Ukraine United Arab Emirates Uruguay USA Uzbekistan Vanuatu Vatican City Venezuela Vietnam Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe