Legislation

On September 30, 2026, the attorneys general of Alabama, Louisiana, and Arkansas filed two federal lawsuits challenging telehealth abortion providers and state shield laws in New York, Massachusetts, and California. The lawsuits seek to prevent enforcement of shield laws that protect providers dispensing abortion drugs into states like Alabama where abortion is restricted, and include claims under state consumer protection statutes of Alabama.

The attorneys general of Louisiana, Arkansas, and Alabama have taken shield law states to the Supreme Court over the trafficking of chemical abortion pills into pro-life states, alleging these actions break state laws. This legal action involves Alabama directly through its attorney general's participation in the case against the distribution of abortion pills across state lines.

The appropriate, pro-life response to the Alabama ruling is not to gut Louisiana’s IVF laws. Rather, it is to recognize that ultimately, it is up to the industry to avoid another “Alabama situation” by maintaining standards that would have prevented the events that led to the Court case in the first place, and to reinforce those standards through legislative action that establishes, maintains, and reinforces accountability. Sen. Pressly’s bill does the opposite.