Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill is escalating her fight against abortion pills flowing into states that have banned the procedure, filing two lawsuits Wednesday — one targeting the providers accused of shipping the drugs, and another challenging the blue-state laws shielding those providers from prosecution.
Murrill, joined by Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall and Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin, sued New York, California and Massachusetts directly at the Supreme Court. The attorneys general allege that the three states' shield laws block cooperation with out-of-state investigations into abortion-pill providers, according to Fox News and Yahoo's summary of the filings. A separate lawsuit filed in Louisiana names more than 30 people and organizations accused of advertising, prescribing, dispensing or shipping abortion pills into the three states.
"And we're going to continue to do everything that we can to enforce the laws in our states."
The Supreme Court complaint cites Louisiana's unsuccessful effort to extradite New York physician Margaret Carpenter, who has been indicted in Louisiana over allegations she prescribed abortion drugs that were sent into the state. According to the filing, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul declared there was "no way in hell" she would comply with Louisiana's request. The complaint further states that New York later strengthened its shield law, including by allowing prescribers of abortion drugs to keep their names off prescription labels.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom similarly rejected Louisiana's January request to extradite California physician Remy Coeytaux, saying California would not help other states punish doctors for providing abortion access that is legal in California.
"These shield laws are very comprehensive," Murrill said, arguing that California and New York prohibit officials from assisting other states seeking to enforce judgments stemming from abortion-related conduct. "We are going to take down those laws using every tool that we have at our disposal."
The 100-page complaint alleges providers used online questionnaires to collect information from customers before mailing abortion drugs into states where their distribution is prohibited. According to Fox News, the filing alleges some organizations pressured or deceived individuals into taking the medication — an allegation that, if proven, would be a criminal matter in any jurisdiction.
The legal action is the latest front in a widening state-by-state battle over abortion that has accelerated since the Supreme Court's 2022 ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, which struck down Roe v. Wade and returned abortion policy to elected officials in each state. That means, in practice, that a state like Louisiana can ban the shipment of abortion drugs within its borders — while a state like California can pass laws designed to make those bans unenforceable.
Both suits were filed Wednesday according to Fox News and reporting from other outlets covering the story, including Red states challenge mail-order abortion shield laws for providers.
The dispute now sits before a Supreme Court that has already shown a willingness to revisit the post-Dobbs legal framework. At issue is whether one state's shield law can lawfully obstruct another state's criminal investigation — a question with implications far beyond abortion, touching on extradition, interstate commerce and the basic comity between states.
Our Take
Let's be clear about what's actually happening here, patriots. A coalition of blue states has decided that their laws do not stop at their own borders — they extend into Louisiana, Alabama and Arkansas, where voters and their elected representatives have made a different choice. When Louisiana issues an indictment and New York's governor responds with "no way in hell," that is not a legal argument. That is defiance of the rule of law dressed up as virtue.
The pill pipeline is real, and it is not a pharmacy. Online questionnaires, mailed pills, prescription labels with the prescriber's name stripped off — this is what a black market looks like when it is run by people who believe their cause excuses the crime. If the same operation were shipping unapproved pharmaceuticals into California from a red state, the same attorneys general suing Louisiana today would be demanding federal intervention by sundown.
Murrill's framing is the right one: this is drug dealing. The fact that the product is an abortion pill changes the politics, not the law. And the fact that three states have built a legal wall around that distribution network tells you they know exactly what the law says — they're just counting on their own governors to ignore it.
The Supreme Court now gets to answer a question the Left has spent four years dodging: can states nullify each other's criminal laws? If the answer is yes, then the union is not a union — it is a patchwork of fiefdoms, each free to harbor whoever the others are trying to prosecute. If the answer is no, then Kathy Hochul and Gavin Newsom have a decision to make about whether they still live in the United States.We The People should be watching this one closely. The same shield-law logic that protects pill shippers today will be used to protect gun runners and sanctuary criminals tomorrow.
