The GOP's Plan to Shut Down Abortion Pill Websites

3.25.26

Click to skip ahead: Senate Republicans Target Pro-Choice Speech; Everyone Say “Thank You Telehealth Abortion Pills”; Ohio Republicans Co-Opt Feminism; In the States: Virginia, Mississippi, Georgia, Iowa, Tennessee, Washington; National Quick Hits; Campus ‘Free Speech’ Bill Only Protects Anti-Abortion Views

---

Senate Republicans Target Pro-Choice Speech

Senate Republicans are pressuring the FDA to censor online speech about abortion pills—directing the agency to target telemedicine abortion organizations, seize their domains, and “permanently shut down” their websites. The move marks a massive escalation in the attacks on pro-choice speech we’ve been documenting here for months.

Here’s what you need to know: Republicans on the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee sent a letter to FDA chief Marty Makary this week, urging him to “take immediate action to prevent [abortion medication] from being marketed in the U.S. by online retailers.”

Sens. Bill Cassidy, Steve Daines, James Lankford, Cindy Hyde-Smith, and Lindsey Graham lay out, step by step, how the federal agency can attack telehealth organizations both online and off. The Senators even attach a list of websites for the FDA to target—including AidAccess, I Need An A, and carafem.

They call on Makary to:

• Send warning letters to the sites, telling them they’re violating federal law “by offering unapproved and misbranded chemical abortion drugs for sale to U.S. consumers.”

• Initiate domain takedowns by filing complaints with domain registrars, pushing them to strip the URL from their clients—and threatening them with legal action if they don’t comply.

• Work with Customs and USPS to inspect packages that might contain abortion medication, and to record data on the outside of those packages before they’re delivered “to obtain evidence about the commission of a crime.” That means both providers and patients could be tracked.

• Work with the Justice Department to investigate and prosecute the organizations—including individuals, entities, and “co-conspirators,” language so broad it could sweep in not just providers but advocacy organizations, abortion funds, activists, and anyone who connects patients to these websites.

Though the lawmakers try to give all this the veneer of credibility by claiming they’re simply targeting “unapproved drugs,” it’s clear that the real goal is shutting down the information infrastructure that helps people get abortion pills.

You’ll notice that at multiple points in the letter, the Senators accuse these groups of “false advertising”—the same claim Republicans have used against Planned Parenthood, and the same legal strategy South Dakota’s attorney general weaponized in an attempt to take down an ad campaign from Mayday Health.

There’s more: the letter to Makary is part of an investigation Republicans have launched into the three abortion pill manufacturers: Danco Laboratories, GenBioPro, and Evita Solutions. Senators’ letters to those companies make it even clearer that this is really about speech.

Republicans demand that the companies explain why they link to certain websites—like Abortion Finder and Plan C—claiming that the groups are “actively facilitating” illegal access to the pills by doing so. In other words, pharmaceutical companies are facing federal scrutiny just for linking to resource directories.

Republicans’ letter to Evita—the company behind the newly approved generic mifepristone—is even more blatant. Apparently it’s a real problem that Evita’s website says medication abortion is “rife with medically unnecessary restrictions and social stigma,” and that its mission is to “destigmatize abortion care” and “commit to making care accessible.”

“[S]tatements like this show that Evita may not fulfill its legal obligations to ensure that the few remaining REMS safeguards are complied with to protect women from serious harm from chemical abortion drugs.”

Let’s pause for a moment: GOP lawmakers are saying that expressing a pro-choice point of view on your own company’s website is evidence of future regulatory non-compliance.

That’s not about drug safety—it’s about turning pro-choice speech itself into something suspect. Whether it’s linking to a resource directory, explaining how medication abortion works, or simply stating that abortion should be accessible—Republicans want it all recast as aiding and abetting.

What these HELP Committee letters represent is the federal government being asked to join that effort explicitly, using the guise of drug regulation to police (and ultimately erase) abortion information online.

Everyone Say “Thank You Telehealth Abortion Pills”

That was a lot, so here’s the good news: there’s a reason why Republicans are putting so much effort into banning abortion medication—and telehealth access, specifically. Despite fifty years of work, billions of dollars, and untold activist hours—conservatives haven’t been able to reduce the abortion rate. That’s because abortion pills and the providers who ship them are allowing women to sidestep draconian Republican bans.

Consider the latest report from the Guttmacher Institute—which shows fewer people are being forced to leave their states for care thanks to telehealth abortion pills.

Guttmacher reports that in the first year after Dobbs, about 170,000 people traveled across state lines for abortion. That number fell to 154,000 in 2024 and to 142,000 in 2025. In the same time period, telehealth abortions increased from 72,000 to 91,000 in states with total abortion bans.

This matches up with other recent data on abortion: #WeCount reported in December that telehealth abortions now make up nearly 30% of all abortions, and account for nearly all abortions in states with bans. That’s largely thanks to shield state providers and groups like Aid Access, who ship medication into states where abortion is legal.

Now, that doesn’t mean that people aren’t being forced to travel for abortions; of course they are. As telehealth abortions increase in banned states, out-of-state patients are on the rise for pro-choice states. In Illinois, for instance, out-of-state patients accounted for about a quarter of procedural abortions last year. In New Mexico and Kansas, out-of-state patients made up nearly two-thirds of abortions in 2025.

Guttmacher data scientist Isaac Maddow-Zimet says this data isn’t “surprising,” but the report marks “the first time that we’ve been able to put out specific numbers.”

Ohio Republicans Co-Opt Feminism (& Piss Us Off)

Ohio Republicans are fucking exhausting. They’ve just advanced a 24-hour waiting period out of the state House this week, even though a judge blocked enforcement of a similar law in 2024 and Ohio voters enshrined abortion rights in 2023.

To add insult to injury, they’re pretending it’s a feminist bill.

“I am proud to stand behind and support women,” Rep. Meredith Craig said in a release.

So what does this woman-friendly legislation do? Well, when someone wants an abortion—which is their constitutional right—the state forces them to take a time out first. Framed as an “informed consent” bill, HB 347 would also require providers to scare patients with false information about the risks of abortion and lie to them about abortion ‘reversal’.

Pretty standard anti-abortion nonsense, but it’s the appropriated feminist rhetoric that does me in. To start, Republicans have the nerve to call this bill the SHE Wins Act. Who wins? Certainly not women!

And Rep. Melanie Miller says, “I’m tired of women being lied to about abortion.” We’re lying to women?! Then there’s David Mahan from the Center for Christian Virtue, who is playing feminist terminology bingo:

“A woman should not be denied information that could lead her to a different choice, especially if she experiences doubt or coercion.”

Like I said, exhausting.

In the States: Virginia, Mississippi, Georgia, Iowa, Tennessee, Washington

Republicans in Ohio are far from the only ones co-opting feminist language. Consider how disciplined the Virginia GOP has been in their campaign against the pro-choice ballot measure heading to voters later this year. Check out the regurgitated messaging from Delegate Eric Zehr during a local meeting in Altavista:

“There is nothing in that amendment to protect mothers. This is a sex trafficker’s dream, because we’ve got young ladies who are going to be going through these clinics—no recordkeeping, no documentation, no parental notification. That is a big piece, and that really alarms me.”

Then there’s Republicans in Mississippi, who are advancing HB 1613, which would punish anyone who prescribes or dispenses abortion pills with up to ten years in prison. Rep. Celeste Hurst claimed there’s “no oversight” on abortion pills being shipped into the state:

“Anyone, male or female, could fill out a form and have that drug shipped to them. A human trafficker could put it in a woman’s hot cocoa.”

Take a drink every time a Republican says ‘trafficking’ challenge! (We’d all be blackout. 🥂)

Let’s check in on Georgia, where a young mother has been charged with murder for allegedly taking abortion pills. If you missed Abortion, Every Day’s explainer yesterday, check it out below:

What to Know When a Pregnancy Arrest Goes Viral

One thing I didn’t include in the piece, which I think is incredibly telling, is the response from anti-abortion groups in the state. The Georgia Life Alliance, well aware that the state’s ban doesn’t allow for the prosecution of patients, claims “the newborn’s death” was caused by a painkiller Alexia Moore allegedly took alongside abortion pills.

From the group’s press release:

“Efforts to mischaracterize this case as an attack on women or as a consequence of pro-life laws are intentionally misleading and purposefully serve to create further fear and confusion. This is about the death of a child who was born alive and the application of laws that have existed for decades…Georgia law does not criminalize miscarriage or pregnancy outcomes, and this case should not be mischaracterized as such.”

This is anti-abortion activists trying to have their cake and eat it too: they want to see Moore punished, but don’t want to say the state’s ban would allow that to happen. It’s always language games with these maniacs.

Iowa saw a 22% drop in abortions in 2025, Iowa Public Radio reports. That number includes both procedural and telehealth abortions after Iowa enacted a 6-week ban in July 2024. The Guttmacher Institute, which provided the data, pointed out that many Iowans are traveling to states like Illinois, Minnesota, and Nebraska for care.

Guttmacher’s data on states with bans shows exactly what you’d expect—spikes in telehealth medication abortions. Texas telehealth abortions went from 12,400 to nearly 42,000. And The Tennessean reports that telehealth abortions in Tennessee have tripled: from 1,800 in 2023 to more than 7,500 in 2025. (No wonder Tennessee Republicans are working so hard to advance strict restrictions on pills.)

Finally, some much-needed good news out of Washington, where the newly-approved state budget restores $8.5 million in funding for Planned Parenthood clinics in the state. (Remember, those dollars were cut from the Abortion Access Project last year.) Karl Eastlund, CEO of Planned Parenthood of Greater Washington and North Idaho, says, “We don’t have to panic; we know that our patients will continue to have funding.”

Quick hits:

• Ms. magazine digs into a legal challenge against Colorado’s parental notification law, which argues that the law violates the state’s ERA.

• Wisconsin’s Supreme Court justice candidates answer questions about abortion;

• And great news in Illinois, where the House Human Services Committee advanced legislation that would create a state abortion fund program.

Campus 'Free Speech' Bill Only Protects Anti-Abortion Views

The Tennessee Senate has just passed a bill called….the Charlie Kirk Act. Sigh, let’s get into it.

Republicans claim the legislation protects free speech on college campuses by prohibiting public universities from:

• Refusing to invite a speaker because of “the viewpoints expressed or espoused by the speaker”

• Preventing student groups from inviting certain speakers to campus

• Retaliating against a faculty member on account of views expressed in their scholarly work

That all sounds relatively boilerplate until you get to this: schools would also be banned from “discriminating or retaliating” against someone based on their “sincere religious beliefs” or their “opposition to abortion, homosexuality, or transgender behavior, regardless of whether that opposition is motivated by religious or non-religious beliefs.”

Unsurprisingly, the bill doesn’t say anything about those who support abortion rights and the LGBTQ community. Apparently discrimination and retaliation against those kinds of students and faculty members is just fine.

We shouldn’t be surprised. Over the last few months, a Notre Dame professor was forced to step down because she wrote a pro-choice op-ed after Roe fell; an author and abortion provider had her speech canceled at Texas Tech, with conservatives calling it “illegal”; and Students for Life is running a whole snitch campaign—urging students and staff to turn each other in for “infractions” around “promoting” abortion.

Yet under the so-called “Charlie Kirk Act,” groups that are racist, misogynist, and anti-LGBTQ would be offered special protections. In fact, the legislation even takes a page out of the anti-abortion bounty hunter playbook: it would allow everyday citizens to sue schools and people for “violations.”

National Quick Hits

• Media Matters digs into how anti-abortion groups are trying to appeal to the MAHA sect with their abortion-in-the-water insanity;

• KFF digs into a legislative trend we’ve also been raising the alarm about: bills that outlaw state regulation of crisis pregnancy centers;

• The Associated Press has a rundown of some of the attacks on abortion pills—from state legislation to court battles.

• And Students for Life has announced a new leg of their campus tour—here’s hoping your school isn’t on the list. 🤮