The Upcoming SCOTUS Abortion Pill Case Could Be the Next Dobbs

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments next week, on Tuesday, March 26, in a case against the abortion pill mifepristone, filed against the FDA and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services by the conservative legal group Alliance Defending Freedom on behalf of anti-abortion doctors and dentists. The Court will issue its ruling by summer—just months before the fall election, when voters will decide on the next U.S. president and control of Congress.

“This case is not based on any kind of medical or scientific fact around abortion. It’s purely based on politics,” said Elisa Wells of the abortion pill advocacy group Plan C. “The fact that it’s been allowed to progress so far in the court system is outrageous.”

(This article originally appears in the Spring 2024 issue of Ms. Join the Ms. community today and you’ll get issues delivered straight to your mailbox!)

Abortion Bans = Sex Discrimination

On Jan. 29, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that a law banning Medicaid funding for abortion discriminates against women, in violation of the state’s Equal Rights Amendment. The decision overturned a 1985 case saying the ERA did not apply to abortion.

“The Pennsylvania case is so sweeping and strong in the way that it identifies interference with reproductive decision-making as a form of sex discrimination and as part of the historic pattern of oppression of women. It’s really beautiful,” said Susan J. Frietsche, co-executive director of the Women’s Law Project, which filed the case on behalf of Pennsylvania abortion providers.

(This essay is part of “The ERA Is Essential to Democracy” Women & Democracy collection. It also appears in the Spring 2024 issue of Ms. Join the Ms. community today and you’ll get issues delivered straight to your mailbox!)

Abortion Pill Revolution: CVS and Walgreens Now Selling Abortion Pills, While Telehealth Abortion Soars

Two developments are significantly increasing access to abortion pills, which have been available for over two decades but highly restricted until recently:

(1.) On March 1, CVS and Walgreens announced they will begin dispensing abortion pills at brick-and-mortar pharmacies in some states, with a promise to expand to more states soon.

(2.) Meanwhile, the Society of Family Planning released its #WeCount report showing that telehealth abortion—where patients consult remotely with a provider, who then mails abortion pills to them—has increased to 16 percent of all abortions.

Subminimum Wage Is a Legacy of Slavery: Time for One Fair Wage

While some states have eliminated the subminimum wage, or raised it above the paltry federal rate, the vast majority of states still allow employers to pay servers less than minimum wage. Restaurant servers in the U.S. are about 70 percent female and disproportionately women of color. Young people, disabled workers and incarcerated people in many states also receive subminimum wages.

The system of subminimum wages and tipping is a legacy of slavery. After the Civil War, white business owners replaced wages with tipping because they did not want to pay their Black employees. Today, the subminimum wage harms women of color, in particular, who face biases from customers, which shows up in lower tips.

Healthcare Across Borders: Funding Telemedicine Abortion for People in Abortion-Ban States

“You can get on the phone with a doctor, and get abortion pills by mail within a few days,” said Healthcare Across Borders (HCAB) founder Jodi Jacobson—even in states with abortion bans.

HCAB has launched a new Abortion Pill Sustainability Fund to support shield-state clinicians serving patients in states banning abortion. Abortion services are provided to people located in states banning abortion from the six states with telemedicine provider shield laws: Massachusetts, Washington, Colorado, Vermont, New York and California.

Project 2025: The Right’s Dystopian Plan to Dismantle Civil Rights and What It Means for Women

Wealthy right-wing think tank The Heritage Foundation has published a detailed plan for the next Republican president to use the executive branch of the federal government to attack the rights of women, LGBTQ people and the BIPOC community, by eliminating the agencies and offices responsible for enforcing civil rights laws and placing trained right-wing ideologues in staff positions throughout the federal government. 

To develop this plan, the Heritage Foundation organized a broad coalition of over 90 conservative organizations—a who’s-who of groups that have led attacks on reproductive rights and bodily autonomy, gender studies, the Equal Rights Amendment and #MeToo initiatives.

A Once-a-Week Contraceptive Pill, Without Side Effects? Yes, Mifepristone.

Research has for decades indicated that mifepristone may be a safe and effective contraceptive, but no one has conducted a large clinical trial to produce the proof that could form the basis for government approval of the drug for this use. Until now.

Pioneering reproductive health advocate Dr. Rebecca Gomperts is now leading a clinical trial of a low dose of the abortion medication mifepristone for use as a weekly contraceptive pill. 

‘Deliver Us From Evil’: Rape, Reproductive Coercion and the Catholic Church

Catholic priests and bishops perpetrate and tolerate astounding levels of sexual violence, and then deny their victims the right to prevent or end life-threatening pregnancies.

The all-male Catholic leadership’s long history of perpetuating sexual assault and reproductive coercion grows out of a toxic masculinity that devalues women’s lives, rights and dignity. Both are forms of intimate assault that deny the bodily autonomy of women in particular.

Given the Catholic Church’s history of clergy sexual abuse, and their callous disregard for the reproductive health and safety of women, why are priests and bishops considered to have any moral authority on issues of sexuality?

Pennsylvania ERA Applies to Abortion Restrictions, Says State Supreme Court: ‘This Is a Big Victory’

Abortion providers can challenge the Pennsylvania ban on Medicaid coverage for abortion as sex discrimination under the state’s Equal Rights Amendment and Equal Protection provisions of the Pennsylvania Constitution, according to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. The decision overturned a 1985 case that said the ERA did not apply to abortion. The ban on Medicaid funding will now be reviewed as sex discrimination.

Two justices of the court explicitly stated that the Pennsylvania Constitution “secures the fundamental right to reproductive autonomy, which includes a right to decide whether to have an abortion or to carry a pregnancy to term. … Whether or not to give birth is likely the most personal and consequential decision imaginable in the human experience. Any self-determination is dependent on the right to make that decision.”