A new threat to abortion rights is emerging nationwide: the ability of private citizens to sue over out-of-state abortion care. Jerry Rodriguez, a Texas citizen, has sued Remy Coeytaux, a doctor who practices in California, for prescribing abortion pills to Rodriguez’s girlfriend on two separate occasions. While this lawsuit may be the first of its kind, it reflects a broader pattern of attempts to control women’s bodies even across state lines.
Rodriguez is not only trying to sue Coeytaux. He is also attempting to prohibit Coeytaux from providing abortion pills for the rest of his career. The lawsuit represents an effort by anti-abortion states to restrict abortion access beyond their own borders. If this lawsuit succeeds, it could set a dangerous precedent, allowing individuals to target abortion providers in states where abortion is legal. That outcome threatens access nationwide.
At the center of this case is Texas’s “Woman and Child Protection Act.” Despite its name, the law allows any Texan to sue individuals who assist Texas patients in obtaining abortion pills. This provision has opened the door for lawsuits against providers in other states. In response, states that protect abortion rights are pushing back. California, for example, has enacted “Shield Laws” designed to protect providers from out-of-state prosecution. With conflicting laws in place, abortion access remains uncertain and increasingly contested.
Since the overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022 with the Dobbs decision, demand for abortion pills has surged. This increase is especially pronounced in conservative states where in-person abortion clinics have closed or severely limited services. For many people in these states, medication abortion obtained by mail has become the most accessible option.
If this lawsuit succeeds, the consequences will fall hardest on low-income individuals. Traveling out of state for abortion care requires time off work, transportation, and lodging. All of which are costs that many cannot afford. Mailed abortion pills offer a more affordable and practical alternative. Without that option, many people could be forced to carry unwanted pregnancies, putting their health and economic stability at risk.
This lawsuit functions as a warning to abortion providers across the country. It seeks to intimidate doctors who practice in states where abortion remains legal. The ongoing conflict between states highlights the instability created by the loss of federal protections and the harmful and threatening impacts. This fight will never end; without the protection from Roe, abortion rights remain vulnerable to continued legal attacks.
