A “Scheme” Against Dobbs: SCOTUS Dissent Hints at Next Phase of Abortion Rights Fight
The Supreme Court ruled that telehealth access to mifepristone can continue, with Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissenting. They argued the 1873 Comstock Act prohibits mailing abortion medication, suggesting a future legal challenge to abortion access. While mifepristone remains available for now, advocates warn that the dissents signal ongoing threats to reproductive rights.
- ▪The Supreme Court upheld telehealth access to mifepristone, allowing patients to receive the abortion medication by mail.
- ▪Justice Clarence Thomas cited the Comstock Act of 1873 in his dissent, arguing it bans mailing drugs used to induce abortion.
- ▪Legal experts question the enforceability of the Comstock Act, citing First Amendment concerns and a 2022 DOJ memo stating it does not apply to abortion medications.
- ▪Conservatives, including Thomas and Alito, have pushed to enforce the Comstock Act to restrict abortion access nationwide.
- ▪Advocates warn that enforcing the Comstock Act could disrupt not only medication abortion but also the broader reproductive health care supply chain.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
A “Scheme” Against Dobbs: SCOTUS Dissent Hints at Next Phase of Abortion Rights Fight Justice Clarence Thomas argues the Comstock Act, passed in 1873, prohibits the mailing of abortion medication. Jessica Washington May 16 2026, 6:14 a.m. Share Copy link Share on Facebook Share on Bluesky Share on X Share on LinkedIn Share on WhatsApp An abortion rights activist holds a box of mifepristone pills at a protest in front of the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., on March 26, 2024. Photo: Amanda Andrade-Rhoades/AP Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito found themselves in the minority on Thursday, when the court ruled that telehealth access to the abortion drug mifepristone could continue, leaving the dissenting conservatives to foreshadow a future showdown over abortion…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at The Intercept.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from The Intercept
