Health

A Government for Big Tobacco and Bigger Families

PUBLISHED 5/14/2026 by

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) made multiple headlines this week—starting with the on-again-off-again tenure of Dr. Marty Makary in his role as FDA commissioner. The FDA has drawn the ire of antiabortion activists over the agency’s approach to mifepristone regulation, including its approval last year of a generic version of the drug.

A so-called “safety report” on mifepristone, commissioned by HHS, is not due to be issued by the FDA until the fall, keeping the issue out of the public eye in the leadup to the midterms. (The timing, quite frankly, is a boon to Republicans.)

The real concern that appears to have been the final straw for the commissioner? Flavored vapes. Whereas the White House has been waging a campaign to appease tobacco donors by authorizing mint, tea and spice-flavored e-cigarettes, in March, the FDA issued a memo saying that it would draw the line at fruit and candy flavors. (Always looking out for the kids.) Yet somehow last week, blueberry and mango made it over the finish line. Sweet enough to satisfy Big Tobacco? Time will tell.

There’s nothing quite like coining a word like “under-babied” while peddling fruity vapes—all while gas prices are soaring, workplace benefits for parents are being rolled back, health insurance remains out of reach for millions, affordable housing is an oxymoron, and on and on.

Such is the legacy of a single week of news out of our nation’s top federal health agency.

The Supreme Court Keeps Mifepristone Available by Mail as Litigation Continues

PUBLISHED 5/14/2026 by | UPDATED 5/15/2026 at 10:33 A.M. PT

The mifepristone case that has landed on the Supreme Court’s shadow docket is the new face of conservative efforts to impose a nationwide ban on abortion.

It’s possible that the Court is close and needs a little more time to reach a decision. There has been some thought it might set the case for argument on the merits as early as next month, or more realistically, next term, and decide it on the merits quickly, at least as courts count time.

But given the political weight of the issue in a midterm election year, the Court could also return to its history with mifepristone: kicking the can down the road. That’s what they did when the Texas case, Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. FDA, came before it in June 2024, deciding that the plaintiffs lacked standing and dismissing the case, instead of ruling on the substantive issue.

The Supreme Court Preserved Mail-Order Abortion Pills—for Now. Julie Kay Says Providers Are Still Preparing.

PUBLISHED 5/14/2026 by | UPDATED 5/15/2026 at 12:02 P.M. PT

Thursday, May 14, at 5 p.m. ET, the Supreme Court’s temporary stay in the mifepristone case is set to expire, once again leaving abortion providers, patients and advocates waiting to see whether the Court will extend the pause, or allow the Fifth Circuit’s restrictions on mifepristone to take effect.

If the Court does nothing, the lower-court ruling could snap back into place, threatening mail-order and telemedicine access to mifepristone, one of the two drugs commonly used in medication abortion.

But abortion rights advocates say the story does not end there. Telemedicine abortion networks, shield-law protections, advance provision and community-based access have already reshaped abortion care in the post-Dobbs landscape—and those systems are continuing to evolve.

Julie F. Kay, a human rights lawyer and founder and executive director of Reproductive Futures, has spent years working at the intersection of reproductive rights, telemedicine abortion and shield-law protections. She co-founded the Abortion Coalition for Telemedicine, challenged Ireland’s abortion ban before the European Court of Human Rights, and co-authored Controlling Women: What We Must Do Now to Save Reproductive Freedom.

Keeping Score: Supreme Court Blow to Voting Rights Will ‘Silence Our Voices’; Conservative Judges Try to Restrict Mifepristone; Moms Worry About Putting Food on the Table

PUBLISHED 5/14/2026 by | UPDATED 5/15/2026 at 10:38 A.M. PT

In every issue of Ms., we track research on our progress in the fight for equality, catalogue can’t-miss quotes from feminist voices and keep tabs on the feminist movement’s many milestones. We’re Keeping Score online, too—in this biweekly roundup.

This week:
—The Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act, slashing protections against racially discriminatory voting laws.
—A record high amount of books were censored from libraries in 2025, often due to LGBTQ characters or plotlines addressing racism.
—A third of moms living on low incomes have gone into debt or skipped meals so their kids could eat.
—Just 22 percent of American voters have significant confidence in the Supreme Court.
—In 2025 the number of abortions in the U.S. remained stable, but more patients in states with bans turned to telehealth services instead of traveling out of state.
—The Department of Justice announced plans to expand the use of the federal death penalty.
—An Epstein-Maxwell survivor, who asked to remain anonymous, laments, “I kept my identity protected as Jane Doe. I woke up one day with my name mentioned over 500 times. While the rich and powerful remain protected by redaction, my name was exposed to the world.”
—The Trump administration launched a Moms.gov site on Mother’s Day that refers pregnant people to unregulated crisis pregnancy centers.
—A Ms. piece on solitary confinement by Kwaneta Harris and her daughter Summer Knight won Kwaneta second place in the Collaboration category of the Stillwater Awards for prison journalism.
—Liberation, a play about 1970s feminism by Bess Wohl, won the Pulitzer Prize for drama. It was also nominated for the Tony Award for Best Play. Wohl was inspired by her own life: Her mother, Lisa Cronin Wohl, was an early Ms. contributor.

… and more.

Yes, You Can Still Get Abortion Pills by Mail—Here’s What to Know

PUBLISHED 5/11/2026 by | UPDATED 5/15/2026 at 10:40 A.M. PT

On May 1, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a sweeping ruling seeking to prohibit telehealth prescribing of mifepristone, forcing women to see a provider in-person to acquire the first pill in the standard two-drug medication abortion regimen. The decision would have blocked U.S. clinicians from mailing abortion pills after telehealth consultations nationwide.

On May 4, however, the U.S. Supreme Court temporarily paused that ruling, preserving current telehealth and mail access while the justices consider next steps. The Court’s temporary ruling was set to last until 5 p.m. ET on Monday, May 11, giving the justices time to decide whether to extend the pause or let the lower-court ruling take effect.

Then, on Monday afternoon, the U.S. Supreme Court briefly extended its temporary order preserving telehealth and mail access to mifepristone while the justices continue deliberating over the emergency appeal. Justice Samuel Alito extended the Court’s administrative stay through Thursday, May 14, at 5 p.m. ET, keeping on hold the Fifth Circuit’s May 1 ruling that would have required patients nationwide to obtain the medication through in-person visits. The order means that, for now, people can still access mifepristone through telehealth consultations and mail delivery under the current FDA rules.

National Institute for Reproductive Health president Christian LoBue said the Supreme Court’s decision “preserves telehealth access to mifepristone for now,” but warned it also “prolongs an untenable state of uncertainty for patients and providers nationwide.” Antiabortion forces are “focused on creating chaos and fear, not improving health outcomes,” she said, urging states to instead focus on strengthening protections for providers, patient privacy and access to medication abortion.

Regardless of what the courts ultimately decide, abortion access advocates, international telehealth providers and community networks say they are prepared to continue helping people access abortion pills.

Either way, the infrastructure for medication abortion access already exists—and it is not disappearing.

Imagining a World Where No Mothers Die

PUBLISHED 5/8/2026 by

More than 700 women die each day, on average, from causes linked to pregnancy or childbirth. Almost all of these deaths are preventable. 

To honor the world’s mothers, we asked midwives about their memories of helping women survive the journey to motherhood. And we asked how the world would be different if no woman died in the act of creating life.

When Mothers Speak, Medicine Must Listen

PUBLISHED 5/7/2026 by

When my daughter was 2 weeks old, she stopped eating. She would go nearly 24 hours without food, crying constantly and losing weight while seeming to be in excruciating pain. Over five months, I took her to more than 50 doctors appointments searching for answers, only to be dismissed as hysterical, hormonal or “over-medicalizing” my baby.

By the time doctors finally recognized that she was suffering from a milk allergy and reflux, the prolonged pain had caused bottle aversion—a life-threatening condition in which babies become too traumatized to eat. She was later diagnosed with ARFID, a trauma-based eating disorder that still affects her today.

What happened to my daughter forced me to confront a devastating question: Would we have been treated differently if I weren’t a woman of color? Research has repeatedly shown that Black women and children are less likely to have their pain taken seriously by medical providers, and over the last decade, federal programs aimed at identifying and addressing those disparities began making meaningful progress. But under the Trump administration, many of those initiatives are being dismantled in the name of fighting “DEI,” with funding slashed, bias training suspended and research into racial disparities frozen or erased altogether.

My daughter is now in preschool—playing, laughing and growing—but she still struggles to eat enough to meet her nutritional needs.

Our story is not an isolated tragedy; it is a warning about what happens when healthcare systems stop listening to mothers and when political attacks on equity research blind medicine to its own biases. If we truly value mothers and children, we cannot treat efforts to understand racial disparities in healthcare as expendable.

The Fifth Circuit Proves Abortion Is on the Ballot this November

PUBLISHED 5/7/2026 by | UPDATED 5/15/2026 at 10:41 A.M. PT

A highlight of being in Ireland has been following the local news, especially the robust abortion beat: Irish lawmakers have been waging a loud fight to expand abortion rights—in particular, to ensure unnecessary waiting periods don’t impede access to care.

Breaking headlines from the United States were a dark juxtaposition.

The U.S. is one of only four nations worldwide actively rolling back reproductive rights.

And now we’re threatened with yet another fight: The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling late last week aiming to create the most significant setback to abortion access since the Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision four years ago.

The three-member panel, two of whom are Trump appointees, blocked a 2023 FDA policy allowing mifepristone to be prescribed by telehealth providers and delivered by mail—a decision that applies to all states, whether abortion is legal or not, and where voters have mobilized to pass ballot measures and enshrine reproductive rights in their state constitutions.

This Fifth Circuit ruling is not the final word on the case. The two pharmaceutical companies that make mifepristone, Danco and GenBioPro, immediately filed an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court. On Monday, Justice Samuel Alito announced an administrative stay through May 11, meaning the decision is on hold until at least then, while the justices review the appeal and decide whether the medically unnecessary in-person dispensing requirements can be reimposed for the duration of the litigation.

In the spirit of the fighting Irish, readers should take heart that the community of U.S. abortion providers, advocates and support networks “have shown amazing resilience and tenacity since the Dobbs decision,” according to Kelly Baden of Guttmacher. “They will continue to do what they can do to ensure that everyone, regardless of where they live, can access the abortion care they need.”

So, for now, our citizen mobilization strategy must be twofold: Support those who directly deliver those services and get ready to get loud. The abortion fight shows that access to healthcare, the integrity of science, the rules of democracy, and the right to bodily autonomy are not only all interconnected, but they are all on the ballot this November.

Tennessee Tries to Silence Women Nearly Killed by Its Abortion Ban: ‘We Will Have Our Day in Court,’ Pledges Lead Plaintiff

PUBLISHED 5/6/2026 by

Tennessee was supposed to face nine women in court on April 27 in a closely watched trial over the state’s abortion ban—women who say they were denied emergency care, forced to flee the state for abortions, or pushed to the brink of death after suffering catastrophic pregnancy complications. After waiting nearly three years to testify publicly about what happened to them, the plaintiffs were prepared to finally take the stand.

Then, less than two business days before the trial was set to begin, Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti (yes, the same Skrmetti whose name is now attached to the Supreme Court’s landmark anti-trans healthcare ruling) filed an appeal invoking a newly enacted state law which prevents Tennesseans from suing over any state law that harms them. The move stripped the court of jurisdiction over the case, abruptly halting the proceedings and potentially delaying the trial for months or years.

“We should be in court today standing up to Tennessee’s abortion ban,” the Center for Reproductive Rights said in a statement after the cancellation. “These women deserve their day in court. But Tennessee politicians refuse to listen.”

Among the plaintiffs is Allie Phillips, who says she was forced to travel to New York for an abortion after learning her fetus had a fatal diagnosis and that continuing the pregnancy put her own life at risk. By the time she arrived for care, she learned the fetus had already died in utero, placing her at heightened risk of infection and blood clots.

Phillips shares her story and reaction to the canceled trial, in her own words.

“I would have testified about how I would have risked my future fertility and my life if I had stayed pregnant in Tennessee. … I already had a 6-year-old daughter, Adalie, to raise. She needed me to live and be her mom. …

“We’re appealing. We don’t know how it will take but even if it’s five years, we will have our day in court. I’m not going anywhere.”