That leaves the door open for California to come in with an even stronger bill. This law would allow physicians to anonymously prescribe the abortion medications, greatly expanding access to the increasingly popular medication abortion, advocates argued. The bill, officially called AB 260, would shield healthcare providers and patients alike from civil and criminal liability. This is even more critical in states where access to abortion is all but eliminated.
Now, the two-drug regimen of mifepristone and misoprostol is the most common method of abortion in America. It is now used in more than 60% of all abortion procedures. In fact, tens of thousands of studies in the last two and a half decades have overwhelmingly demonstrated that these pills are safe and effective. This is true regardless of whether they are dispensed in person or via telehealth. As telehealth becomes a bigger part of reproductive health, about 27 percent of abortions can now be done through telehealth consultations.
In the process, California pharmacies have become national leaders in the distribution of abortion pills. California-based companies like Honeybee provide most of these medications. As a consequence, the state now ranks first in the country on access to medication abortions. If AB 260 passes, it would not remove identifying information about prescribing clinicians but protect patients and pharmacies involved in mailing these medications, thereby extending California’s legal protections nationwide.
Current Legal Landscape for Medication Abortion
Recent state-level actions leaving the legal landscape surrounding medication abortion even more fraught are further complicating this picture. For example, Louisiana’s GOP Governor Jeff Landry signed laws reclassifying mifepristone and misoprostol as “controlled dangerous substances.” This recent reversal has triggered unprecedented, widespread legal repercussions for practicing physicians. In one instance, New York doctor Margaret Carpenter is currently under indictment after being accused of prescribing abortion pills to a minor.
In Texas, a federal district judge ruled against Carpenter in a civil suit filed by Attorney General Ken Paxton. The court ordered penalties of more than $100,000 and barred Carpenter from prescribing or mailing abortion pills to patients in the state. This chilling atmosphere has raised serious concerns among healthcare providers who are afraid of facing criminal or civil liability for providing routine care.
“We’re being asked to carry out standard-of-care medicine under the constant threat of legal harassment.” – Nouhavandi
New York’s Governor Kathy Hochul has voiced her commitment to protecting Carpenter, emphasizing that she will not extradite her due to the state’s stringent shield laws. These laws shield the identities of patients and providers alike. This protection is more critical than ever as legal challenges to abortion practices are accelerated.
The Role of Telehealth in Abortion Access
Telehealth has transformed the landscape of reproductive healthcare, especially in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. As more patients seek medical guidance remotely, facilities like Dr. Angel Foster’s clinic near Boston have adapted by mailing medications to individuals in states with strict abortion laws.
This sudden move to telehealth was a godsend for countless people now seeking medication abortions. Under existing shield laws, about 12,000 abortions occur each month. Additionally, many of the patients traveling for these procedures come from states where abortion is currently illegal or heavily restricted.
“We’re prescribing 12,000 pills a month to people all over the country.” – New York-based physician
Foster underscores the need to keep access to these services, especially with increasing legal threats to them. She stresses that her in-the-field work these past two years has shown her areas where current laws are lacking. These are areas that are in clear need of clarification or strengthening.
Implications of California’s Proposed Law
If California’s AB 260 passes, that will create a huge historic precedent. This would significantly alter the landscape of how medication abortion is accessed nationwide. Physician and health provider advocates say that this legislation would provide them with legal protection. It would provide a powerful show of solidarity between doctors and other healthcare professionals.
“This bill doesn’t just protect providers legally — it’s a statement that we’re not alone. And that matters because access to care only exists if there are people still willing to provide it.” – Nouhavandi
These opponents of shield laws have a point about the unintended effects of shield legislation. Critics have claimed that these laws are just the latest attempt to wiggle around regulations meant to shield patients and fetuses from unnecessary risks.
“So-called shield laws are yet another tactic abortion activists use to exploit the FDA’s reckless mail-order abortion scheme.” – Erik Baptist
Regardless of the controversy over these proposals, many health care providers say they have a pressing need for this kind of protection from future litigation.
“This is really, really urgent.” – New York-based physician
