MADISON, Wis. — September 9, 2026 — Today, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit heard oral arguments in Louisiana v. FDA, an important case challenging the federal government’s removal of safeguards surrounding the abortion drug mifepristone. 

At the center of this case is Rosalie Markezich, a young Louisiana woman who says she was pressured and coerced by her boyfriend into taking abortion drugs that he obtained online. Because the drugs were obtained remotely, there was no in-person medical visit with a provider who could evaluate Rosalie’s circumstances or identify the coercion she experienced. 

The case also challenges a series of FDA decisions that progressively relaxed mifepristone’s safety requirements. In 2016, the FDA reduced the number of required in-person visits from three to one and changed prescriber reporting requirements to require reporting of fatalities only. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the FDA then stopped enforcing the in-person dispensing requirement, and in 2023 formally removed that requirement, allowing mifepristone to be dispensed through certified pharmacies, including by mail. 

“How many more Rosalies will there need to be before we recognize that basic safeguards are needed?” stated Heather Weininger, Executive Director of Wisconsin Right to Life. “Who is keeping women and girls safe from abuse when abortion drugs can be prescribed without ever seeing a doctor?” 

An in-person visit can provide an opportunity for a medical professional to speak directly with a patient, assess her circumstances, and identify potential medical concerns or signs of coercion. In the Netherlands, the official association of abortion doctors NGvA raised the alarm about ordering abortion pills online without ever seeing a physician. They were concerned that vulnerable women would fall through the cracks without an in-person visit. In the UK, child-safety groups sounded the same alarm, warning that their relaxed COVID-era mail-order abortion pill policy meant young girls could get them with no screening for abuse or coercion. England restored their in-person requirement.  

Yet the FDA ultimately determined that the in-person dispensing requirement was no longer necessary. The FDA is currently reviewing its mifepristone policies. Rosalie’s story demonstrates why these safeguards matter. 

“This is about making sure vulnerable women and girls do not fall through the cracks,” Weininger continued. “Wisconsin Right to Life will continue to follow Louisiana v. FDA and advocate for common sense safeguards for women and girls.”