Anti-abortion activists use coercion story to challenge mail-order abortion pill access

The suit, Louisiana v. FDA, weaponizes tragic but fringe incidents of coercion—where bad actors force pills on women—to rescind the FDA's 2023 Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) changes that removed the in-person dispensing requirement. The plaintiffs seek a judicial order banning mail-order abortion pills entirely, which would block millions of women from legal, safe telehealth abortion. This is not about protecting women from coercion; existing laws already criminalize assault and battery. The real target is abortion access itself. The FDA's own data show that mifepristone has a safety record better than many common drugs like Viagra—over 99% effective with a less than 0.5% serious adverse event rate. Coercion is a separate crime, not a drug safety issue. By framing this case as women's protection, anti-abortion groups like Alliance Defending Freedom aim to create a precedent that would let states ban all abortion pills, even for consensual use, effectively ending medication abortion—which now accounts for over 60% of all U.S. abortions.