Skip to content

News · Health care · Louisiana

States challenge abortion-pill shield laws at Supreme Court

Louisiana, Alabama and Arkansas say laws in New York, California and Massachusetts obstruct investigations into mailed abortion pills.

States challenge abortion-pill shield laws at Supreme Court

Key takeaways

  • Three states sued New York, California and Massachusetts at the Supreme Court.
  • The complaint challenges laws shielding abortion-pill providers.
  • A separate Louisiana lawsuit names more than 30 people and organizations.
  • New York and California rejected Louisiana extradition requests.

Supreme Court dispute

Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill joined Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall and Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin in suing New York, California and Massachusetts at the U.S. Supreme Court. The three Republican attorneys general argue that the states’ shield laws prevent cooperation with investigations of providers accused of sending abortion pills into states where abortion is banned.

The attorneys general also filed a separate lawsuit in Louisiana against more than 30 people and organizations. That case accuses the defendants of advertising, prescribing, dispensing or shipping abortion pills into Louisiana, Alabama and Arkansas.

Murrill described that activity as “drug dealing” and said Louisiana would continue enforcing its laws. The lawsuits target both the providers involved in the interstate distribution system and the state protections that limit assistance with outside investigations or prosecutions.

Extradition conflicts

Louisiana has indicted New York physician Margaret Carpenter and California physician Remy Coeytaux over allegations that they prescribed abortion medication sent into Louisiana. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul and California Gov. Gavin Newsom, both Democrats, rejected Louisiana’s requests to extradite the doctors.

The Supreme Court complaint points to Louisiana’s unsuccessful attempt to extradite Carpenter. New York later expanded its protections, including a provision allowing abortion-drug prescribers to leave their names off prescription labels. Newsom rejected the request involving Coeytaux in January, saying California would not assist another state in punishing doctors for abortion care that is legal in California.

State laws after Dobbs

The dispute follows the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which overturned Roe v. Wade and allowed elected officials to set abortion policy at the state level. The new cases place competing state policies before the courts: abortion restrictions in Louisiana, Alabama and Arkansas, and legal protections for providers operating from New York, California and Massachusetts.

What to watch

  • Any Supreme Court action on the states’ complaint
  • Responses from New York, California and Massachusetts
  • Proceedings in the separate Louisiana lawsuit
  • Further action involving the extradition requests

Was this useful?

Related stories