Amna Nawaz:

Today, the Supreme Court temporarily allowed continued nationwide access to abortion medication that's often distributed by mail. The court issued a one-week stay on a lower court's ruling that would have led to sweeping changes in how mifepristone, one of the two drugs commonly used, can be prescribed.

That ruling would require an in-person doctor's visit before the pills could be prescribed.

For more on the ruling and what comes next, I'm joined now by Mary Ziegler. She's a professor at the University of California, Davis, School of Law.

Mary Ziegler, welcome back to the "News Hour."

Mary Ziegler:

Thanks for having me.

Amna Nawaz:

So just walk us through here exactly what the Supreme Court temporarily paused today. What was the federal court's decision that was put on hold?

Mary Ziegler:

So the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals had put an immediate stop nationwide telehealth access to the pill mifepristone, which is used in more than two-thirds of all abortions nationwide.

And we have data to suggest that at least a quarter, more than a quarter of all abortions nationwide now involve telehealth. That number is likely an undercount, given that some of these procedures are illegal. So we were talking about a significant number of people losing access to abortion, particularly in states where abortion is a crime and where patients were relying on that telehealth access.

Amna Nawaz:

So the Supreme Court issued a one-week hold, essentially. It restores access to mifepristone through telehealth and mail and through pharmacies.

What happens during that week and what happens when the week is over?

Mary Ziegler:

Well, this week should be pretty quiet. The one thing we're watching this week is that we're waiting to see what the Trump administration is going to do.

This is an unusual case because Louisiana, a Republican state, is suing the Trump FDA, essentially to force a change on the regulations governing mifepristone. And we have yet to hear what the Trump administration is going to say.

So we're waiting to see how the Trump administration tries to walk that tightrope between pleasing base voters on the one hand and not potentially alienating swing voters shortly before a midterm. We don't really know what to expect from the Supreme Court once Monday rolls around.

The court could continue an administrative stay as this case returns to the lower courts. The justices could either preview that it thinks either Louisiana or the drug manufacturers, in this case, Danco and GenBioPro, are likely to win later and issue a ruling on that basis.

Or the court could schedule oral argument in this case, either before it recesses for the summer or even in the fall. So there are a lot of different options on the table. And we really, frankly, don't know what to expect.

Amna Nawaz:

If the lower courts ruling is allowed to go back into place, essentially, after the week, tell us a little bit more about what that potential impact could be. What would that look like?

Mary Ziegler:

Well, it would really put an end to kind of what has been the status quo on abortion in the United States since 2022.

We have seen 22 states And the District of Columbia introduce shield laws which protect their residents from out-of-state criminal and civil consequences. And doctors in states like California and New York have taken advantage by mailing pills into states where abortion is a crime.

And the upshot has been that abortion numbers in those states really haven't declined, even though Roe v. Wade was overturned now years ago. So I think that the result would be that abortion bans in those states would be much easier to enforce than had previously been the case. And there would be impacts in states where abortion is legal as well.

In those states, plenty of counties don't have an abortion clinic. That number, of course, has increased since the Big Beautiful Bill passed. So we would see people having to return to abortion clinics, which would be much more challenging for some patients and certainly in states with abortion bans sometimes impossible.

Amna Nawaz:

We know, in the years since Roe was overturned, we have seen a number of court challenges to abortion bans in Republican-led states to broader protections in Democrat-led states.

Is there anything that you have seen that gives you any sense of how the Supreme Court might end up ruling on this?

Mary Ziegler:

We really don't know.

So the only tea leaf we can read is that there was a similar case to this one in 2024, when the court unanimously dismissed a case, a similar challenge to mifepristone, based on standing. And that's been the hope of both the Food and Drug Administration in this case, as well as those drug manufacturers.

So it's possible that we will see the court make the same move. If the court doesn't resolve this case on standing, we have no idea what they're going to do because we haven't heard much from the justices on this.

It's complicated even further by the fact that Louisiana has raised additional arguments in the briefing earlier in this case than the ones resolved by the Fifth Circuit, which focused only on whether the FDA had adequately reviewed the science in permitting telehealth.

Louisiana is also trying to get the court to weigh in on whether a 19th century law called the Comstock Act operates as a ban on mailing any abortion drug or paraphernalia, which would be an even more explosive outcome in some ways. So we don't know which question the court's going to be interested in.

We don't know if this is going to be resolved on standing or go into the merits. And if it goes into the merits, we don't know how the court is going to feel about it, other than, of course, that we have a conservative supermajority, the same majority that overturned Roe v. Wade. But that only tells you so much.

Amna Nawaz:

All right, that is Mary Ziegler of the University of California, Davis, School of Law.

Mary, thank you so much. Good to speak with you.

Mary Ziegler:

Thanks for having me.