Louisiana has suspended its May 16 primary elections for congressional races following the Supreme Court ruling on Wednesday on its congressional map, as districts need to be redrawn in order to be legally compliant.
The Supreme Court ruled that one of the state’s majority-minority districts was illegally racially gerrymandered.
“Yesterday’s historic Supreme Court victory for Louisiana has an immediate consequence for the State. The Supreme Court previously stayed an injunction against the State’s enforcement of the current Congressional map,” Gov. Jeff Landry (R-LA) and Attorney General Liz Murrill (R-LA) said in a statement on Thursday. “By the Court’s order, however, that stay automatically terminated with yesterday’s decision. Accordingly, the State is currently enjoined from carrying out congressional elections under the current map. We are working together with the Legislature and the Secretary of State’s office to develop a path forward.”
Justice Samuel Alito wrote in his majority opinion of the court that “the State’s attempt to satisfy the Middle District’s ruling, although understandable, was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.”
Rep. Troy Carter (D-LA), the only Democrat in the state&#8217;s congressional delegation, blasted the Supreme Court&#8217;s decision as a &#8220;devastating blow.&#8221;
&#8220;The consequences of this decision are immediate and severe: the hard-fought progress that led to the creation of two majority-Black congressional districts in Louisiana is now in jeopardy,&#8221; Carter said in a statement.
“Let’s be clear: this is not about so-called ‘colorblind’ principles. History has shown us time and again that policies claiming neutrality, from literacy tests to poll taxes, have been used to silence Black voices. Louisiana knows this history all too well. Without the protections of the Voting Rights Act, there is no evidence to suggest that Black voters in our state will be able to elect candidates of their choice,&#8221; Carter continued.
It&#8217;s unclear if and how the move will impact other races in the state, as other contests are set to occur that day as well, including the hotly-competitive Republican Senate primary between Rep. Julia Letlow (R-LA) and Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA).
In multiple other states, including Tennessee and Mississippi, map redraws are being weighed that could get rid of deep blue districts that were created under the previous legal scope.
&#8220;I&#8217;ll keep saying it: the Tennessee legislature should reconvene immediately and REDRAW THE LINES!&#8221; Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), who&#8217;s running for governor, posted to X on Thursday. The Volunteer State has a deep blue district in the Memphis area.
Meanwhile, Republican Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves came out ahead of the decision to call for a special session three weeks after the ruling, and it could lead to a redraw of the state&#8217;s Second Congressional District, which is represented by Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS).
In Alabama, Republican Gov. Kay Ivey said her state will not have a special session to change its maps, citing current federal litigation.
“Litigation surrounding Alabama’s congressional districts is pending before the U.S. Supreme Court, and Alabama is currently under a court order prohibiting the use of new congressional districts until after the 2030 census. While we are not in position to have a special session at this time, I hope in light of this new decision, the court is favorable to Alabama,&#8221; she stated, according to <a href="https://1819news.com/news/item/ivey-alabama-not-in-position-to-have-a-special-session-at-this-time-on-redistricting?fbclid=IwY2xjawRgYPtleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBicmlkETF4eHBBZUJ4cml1S21pZzZ4c3J0YwZhcHBfaWQQMjIyMDM5MTc4ODIwMDg5MgABHlCocmN3Zhv-9pRJqL55hgHeyVzlORJ8bmR56akqoP_3QlqgKLRTaFAIf0d3_aem_BKbJw3WmmWStqNC5Kd5ZoA" target="_blank" rel="noopener">1819 News</a>.
Before the court&#8217;s decision, states were already taking major mid-decade redistricting actions, including five Democrat-favored seats in California and five Republican-favored seats in Texas. Virginia voted earlier this month to switch to a 10-1 map favoring Democrats with a net gain of four seats, but it is facing a dicey state Supreme Court battle.
In Florida, the legislature rapidly approved a map for four more Republican-favored seats in the Sunshine State following a push from Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis.

Supreme Court

Louisiana’s Election Calendar Just Got Blown Up After Supreme Court Ruling

Congress

Louisiana

On Wednesday, after the Supreme Court ruled that the Fifteenth Amendment’s prohibition on intentional racial discrimination forbids race-based redistricting, former President Barack Obama issued a screed denouncing the decision that was, in turn, harshly criticized on social media.
“Today’s Supreme Court decision effectively guts a key pillar of the Voting Rights Act, freeing state legislatures to gerrymander legislative districts to systematically dilute and weaken the voting power of racial minorities &#8211; so long as they do it under the guise of ‘partisanship’ rather than explicit ‘racial bias,’” Obama wrote on X. “And it serves as just one more example of how a majority of the current Court seems intent on abandoning its vital role in ensuring equal participation in our democracy and protecting the rights of minority groups against majority overreach. The good news is that such setbacks can be overcome. But that will only happen if citizens across the country who cherish our democratic ideals continue to mobilize and vote in record numbers &#8211; not just in the upcoming midterms or in high profile races, but in every election and every level.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Today’s Supreme Court decision effectively guts a key pillar of the Voting Rights Act, freeing state legislatures to gerrymander legislative districts to systematically dilute and weaken the voting power of racial minorities &#8211; so long as they do it under the guise of…
&mdash; Barack Obama (@BarackObama) <a href="https://twitter.com/BarackObama/status/2049561079605588184?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 29, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The response came quickly:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
You have absolutely lost your mind.
YOU were the guy who was supposed to get us PAST sorting people by race.
You said judge people by character not color.
Now you&#39;re calling it &quot;voter suppression&quot; when the Court strikes down a district drawn ENTIRELY BY SKIN COLOR??!!
The… <a href="https://t.co/2NQ5Xq8Xmh">pic.twitter.com/2NQ5Xq8Xmh</a>
&mdash; Matt Van Swol (@mattvanswol) <a href="https://twitter.com/mattvanswol/status/2049579727061463538?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 29, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
As with tour characterization of Citizens United, not true! Today’s voting-rights blockbuster was the right call and a victory for the colorblind Constitution. The bottom line is that the Voting Rights Act doesn’t require majority-minority districts and states can’t use race to…
&mdash; Ilya Shapiro (@ishapiro) <a href="https://twitter.com/ishapiro/status/2049590119485632845?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 29, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
I can’t imagine being a nations first black president and wanting to take them all the way backwards on race but if you like your garbage legacy you can KEEP your garbage legacy.
&mdash; Jimmy Failla (@jimmyfailla) <a href="https://twitter.com/jimmyfailla/status/2049577005146845426?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 29, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
It was pointed out that the districts as apportioned in Illinois, Obama’s home state, which is run by Democrats, are crazy:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
lol. This is your home state <a href="https://t.co/95DsjmFZox">pic.twitter.com/95DsjmFZox</a>
&mdash; Megan Basham (@megbasham) <a href="https://twitter.com/megbasham/status/2049628329876009449?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 29, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
As well as the current map of Lousiana’s districts, which is well-nigh ridiculous:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
These are the 2 illegal racially gerrymandered districts that the Supreme Court overturned. Any fair map of Louisiana will look nothing like this 👇 <a href="https://t.co/UOzzq2Hus4">pic.twitter.com/UOzzq2Hus4</a>
&mdash; Izengabe (@Izengabe_) <a href="https://twitter.com/Izengabe_/status/2049604602404696464?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 29, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the court, stated, “Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 was designed to enforce the Constitution — not collide with it. Unfortunately, lower courts have sometimes applied this Court’s precedents in a way that forces States to engage in the very race-based discrimination that the Constitution forbids.”
“Allowing race to play any part in government decision making represents a departure from the constitutional rule that applies in almost every other context,” he continued.
Obama’s denigrative use of the phrase “guise of partisanship” was a deliberate attempt to ignore that the Supreme Court opinion was in strict line with the fact that the United States is a constitutional republic. As Alito explained, “Disapproval of partisan gerrymandering dates back to the founding. But partisan gerrymandering claims are not justiciable in federal court. Thus, in considering the constitutionality of a districting scheme, courts must treat partisan advantage like any other race-neutral aim: a constitutionally permissible criterion that States may rely on as desired. For this reason, as we have repeatedly made clear, when a State defends a districting scheme on the ground that it was drawn for partisan purposes, plaintiffs have a ‘special’ burden to overcome.”

US-POLITICS-RIGHTS-JACKSON

‘Absolutely Lost Your Mind’: Obama Ripped After Criticizing Latest Supreme Court Decision

Barack Obama

Elections

gerrymandering

Politics

Race

Redistricting

The Supreme Court delivered a major 6-3 ruling Wednesday, striking down Louisiana’s congressional map in Louisiana v. Callais after the state added a second majority-black district.
The Court said that move wasn’t required under the Voting Rights Act, so using race to draw it made the map unconstitutional. The decision doesn’t eliminate Section 2 but could impact redistricting fights nationwide.
The Court is signaling that states can’t lean on race unless the law clearly demands it. That’s likely to make it harder to push similar redraws in other states and could shift how future maps are drawn heading into upcoming elections.
In the majority opinion, Justice Samuel Alito explained that &#8220;Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 [&#8230;] was designed to enforce the Constitution— not collide with it.&#8221;
However, he rebuked how lower courts used the &#8220;Court’s precedents in a way that forces States to engage in the very race-based discrimination that the Constitution forbids.&#8221;
In her dissent, liberal Justice Elena Kagan wrote that “the consequences are likely to be far-reaching and grave” and referred to Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act as a “dead letter” after the ruling.
“After today, those districts exist only on sufferance, and probably not for long. If other States follow Louisiana’s lead, the minority citizens residing there will no longer have an equal opportunity to elect candidates of their choice. And minority representation in government institutions will sharply decline,” she wrote.
The decision triggered a wide range of reactions across the political spectrum, including intense backlash from the left.
&#8220;Too many people have fought too hard for the right to vote, especially black Georgians. Now the Supreme Court has given Donald Trump &amp; his sycophants license to further destroy democracy and green light racial discrimination.  People should pick their representatives, not the other way around. This is despicable,&#8221; former Georgia Lt. Gov. Geoff Duncan, who switched his party affiliation from Republican to Democrat in 2025, posted to X.
However, Republicans considered the ruling to be a major win.
“Today’s decision is a victory for the Constitution and the principle that every American citizen is equal under the law… This ruling restores fairness, strengthens confidence in our elections, and ensures every voter is treated equally,&#8221; National Republican Campaign Committee Chair Richard Hudson stated, according to <a href="https://x.com/maxpcohen/status/2049506573366473007?s=20" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Punchbowl News</a>.
Gov. Tate Reeves (R-MS) said prior to the ruling that he would call a special session of the Mississippi Legislature to redraw maps in the state three weeks after the court&#8217;s decision in the case. Mississippi&#8217;s Second Congressional District is a deep blue majority-minority district.
&#8220;It is a decision that could (and in my view should) forever change the way we draw electoral maps,&#8221; he posted to X last week. &#8220;It is my belief and federal law requires that the Mississippi Legislature be given the first opportunity to draw these maps. And the fact is, they haven’t had a fair opportunity to do that because of the pending Callais decision.&#8221;
&#8220;It is my sincere hope that, in deciding Callais, the U.S. Supreme Court will reaffirm the animating principle that all Americans are created equal and that when the government classifies its citizens on the basis of race, even as a perceived remedy to right a wrong, it engages in the offensive and demeaning assumption that Americans of a particular race, because of their race, think alike and share the same interests and preferences – a concept that is odious to a free people whose institutions are founded upon the doctrine of equality,&#8221; Reeves continued.

Blue Hour, United States Supreme Court Building, Washington DC, America

Supreme Court Rules On Key District Case With Ripple Effects Nationwide

2026 election

Instead of pointing fingers at permissive judges or poor mental health for the horrific mass shooting in Shreveport, a writer for New York Magazine has decided to blame … the patriarchy.
The outlet claimed that 31-year-old U.S. Army veteran Shamar Elkins, the man accused of killing eight children, including seven of his own, was the victim of a society that believes women belong to men.
“It is tempting to treat Elkins’s actions as the isolated incident of a madman. But poor mental health is never a reasonable explanation for attempting to execute one’s wife and children,” <a href="https://www.thecut.com/article/shreveport-killing-shamar-elkins-mental-health-patriarchy.html">wrote</a> Brittney Cooper, a Cut contributor who “writes about race and systems of power.”
“Patriarchy offers a better explanation for this violence,” she went on. “Patriarchy teaches men that women and children belong to them, that they are property that men get to have, as a male rite of passage. Men are taught, in what bell hooks famously called a ‘white supremacist capitalist patriarchy,’ to measure their worth and value by the size of their bank account, the size of their genitals, and the size of their families. These are forms of toxic self-value, predicated as they are on women and children having no agency or dreams of their own.”
Cooper went on to lament “the rise of the manosphere” and “a nation being led by a group of right-wing extremists with Neanderthal ideas about gender and sexuality.”
“Men who kill their wives and children are not just bad apples who needed a free month of BetterHelp. These killings are the natural outcome of a country enamored with patriarchy and determined to make sure that men can freely dominate women,” she insists.
Readers on social media pushed back strongly on this theory.
“Well you couldn&#8217;t make it about racism, so I guess Patriarchy seemed like a good idea. Though I bet if you tried you could make it about racism and how mostly female mental health professionals won&#8217;t take on poor Black male clients. Of course then, no patriarchy. Tough,” one sarcastic commenter <a href="https://x.com/thevanosam/status/2046572431159038339">wrote</a>.
“The race is inconvenient, so we switch to a gender motive. He was a criminal, a gun criminal no less. But instead of being locked up, the people that screech constantly about gun violence, went easy on him as they always do. It’s a story about leftist policies causing more death,” another person <a href="https://x.com/occhipig/status/2046549453838897514">added</a>.
Elkins, who appeared to be targeting his own “descendants,” opened fire in three different homes across Shreveport on April 19. He was shot and killed by police after he attempted to carjack a vehicle to escape.
Shreveport officials described the shooting as domestic violence, saying Elkins shot the mother of his children and another woman, as well as his seven children and one of their cousins, per <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2026/04/21/shamar-elkins-shreveport-louisiana-shooter/89710200007/">USA Today</a>. 
The outlet noted that Elkins married Shaneiqua Pugh in April 2024. A woman named Christina Snow sued Elkins for child support and was granted joint custody of their child, Sariahh, in 2017. Sariahh was one of the victims of the shooting.

Shreveport shooting

NY Mag Points To Tired Leftist Trope To Explain Horrific Murders

Children

Crime

Murder

Patriarchy

A gunman who appeared to be targeting his own &#8220;descendants&#8221; opened fire in three different homes across the city of Shreveport, Louisiana, on Saturday night — and was shot and killed after he attempted to carjack a vehicle in order to escape.
The suspect in the horrific murder spree was identified later in the day as 31-year-old U.S. Army veteran Shamar Elkins.
According to a <a href="https://nypost.com/2026/04/19/us-news/8-kids-ages-1-to-14-killed-in-mass-shootings-across-shreveport-louisiana/">report</a> published Sunday by The New York Post, Elkins shot ten people, eight of them fatally, in two homes on one street and one other home on a nearby street. The two survivors were adult women, and all eight of the deceased were children ranging in age from one year old to 14 years old. Some of the children are believed to be his.
&#8220;The individual responsible once leaving this scene performed a carjacking right here in close proximity to the corner of West 79th and Lynnwood, at which point in time, Shreveport police patrol officers got behind that vehicle in a chase incident,&#8221; Shreveport Police Department spokesperson Christopher Bordelon said during a press conference. The suspect was shot and killed by police.
&#8220;You have three different scenes, the shooting itself occurred just down the road over here, the 300 block of West 79th,” <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/louisiana-shreveport-mass-shooting-rcna340868">Bordelon added</a>. “There’s also another shooting related to this on Harrison Street, and then there’s an adjacent residence on West 79 where one of the victims ran to after the shooting.&#8221;
&#8220;This is an extensive scene unlike anything most of us have ever seen,&#8221; Police Chief Wayne Smith said, noting that the official crime scene included the scene of the carjacking in addition to the three homes.
&#8220;This is a tragic situation, maybe the worst tragic situation we’ve ever had in Shreveport. So, right now we’re going to process the information and it&#8217;s in very good hands,&#8221; Shreveport Mayor Tom Arceneaux said. &#8220;It’s a terrible morning.&#8221;
A motive for the shooting has not been determined, although several reports indicated that the suspect may have been involved with one of the women who was shot.

Gunman Identified After Horrific Killing Spree Targeting ‘Descendants’

Mass Shooting

Shooting

Violent Crime

Louisiana police have charged a man with impaired driving after his car slammed into a crowd during a community parade on Saturday, injuring several people, some critically.
Louisiana State Police said they arrested Todd Landry, 57, and charged him with driving while impaired, 18 counts of first-degree negligent injuring and careless operation following the incident in New Iberia, Louisiana.
He is also accused of having an open container with an alcoholic beverage in the vehicle.
The incident occurred during a Lao New Year celebration, the Louisiana State Police said in a statement.
&#8220;Multiple pedestrians&#8221; were struck by the vehicle as Landry drove it, police said.
Earlier, the Iberia Parish Sheriff’s Office said at least 15 people had been injured.
Landry showed signs of impairment, and a breath sample showed he had a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of 0.137%, police said. The legal BAC limit for drivers in most U.S. states is 0.08%.
Reuters could not determine if Landry had a lawyer.
Acadian Ambulance posted on social media that it transported 13 people to the hospital. Two of them were airlifted, the ambulance service wrote on X.
Organizers of the Louisiana Lao New Year Festival said on Facebook they were cancelling Saturday evening&#8217;s music concerts, as well as alcohol sales.
&#8220;We are profoundly saddened by the news of the incident near the festival grounds,&#8221; the organizers said on Facebook. &#8220;We are praying for the victims and for their families during this difficult time.&#8221;
The three-day festival held every Easter weekend includes live music, parades and other activities celebrating the Lao New Year.
(Reporting by Noel Randewich in San Francisco; Editing by Sergio Non, Matthew Lewis and Kevin Buckland)

Police lights

Over A Dozen Injured After Drunk Driver Plows Into Parade Crowd

Alcohol

Drunk Driving

U.S.

MixCollage-03-Apr-2026-10-36-AM-7165

The Globe Trotting Lifestyle Of Three Anti-Oil Activists Who Live ‘Like Royalty’

Climate Advocates

Climate Change

New Orleans

Oil companies

A Tuesday hearing could determine whether abortion pills can be shipped across the country without an in-person doctor visit, a practice that has led to an increase in abortions across the United States – even in states where medication abortions are illegal.
Magistrate Judge David Ayo will hear a case from the state of Louisiana challenging regulations put in place by President Joe Biden’s Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that enabled the widespread shipment of the abortion drug mifepristone without an in-person doctor visit. Louisiana argues that the policy undercuts laws it passed to ban medication abortions and has asked the judge to block the regulations while the suit is litigated. 
“As much as we celebrated the fall of Roe v.  Wade, the Dobbs decision has been effectively nullified by the mail-order regime that the Biden FDA has initiated and continues to perpetuate across this country. So we have to win this case for unborn babies and their mothers,” said Erik Baptist, a lawyer with Alliance Defending Freedom who is representing Louisiana.
During a call with pro-life leaders attended by The Daily Wire on Monday, Baptist described the case as the &#8220;most important&#8221; court battle for the pro-life movement since the Dobbs decision.
“When the Supreme Court issued the Dobbs decision and overturned Roe v. Wade, it had the expectation to send the issue back to the people, to their representatives, and also to the states,” he said. “But what happened was that the Biden administration anticipated the Dobbs decision, and then when it came out, tried to nullify that decision.”
The suit, which was filed in November, was also joined by Rosalie Markezich, a woman who says her ex-boyfriend coerced her into ending the life of their unborn child after he ordered illegal abortion pills online.
States like California and New York have enacted “shield laws” to protect abortionists from being extradited to states where they have sent abortion pills in violation of state laws.
Baptist said that the Biden administration used the FDA&#8217;s removal of the in-person requirement to push out the abortion pill throughout the country. In Louisiana, he said that there were as many as 1,000 illegal abortions every month facilitated by the mailing in of abortion drugs. Data released in December by the pro-abortion Society of Family Planning <a href="https://societyfp.org/research/wecount/wecount-june-2025-data/">revealed</a> that the number of monthly abortions across the country continued to increase in 2025 from 2024, which was itself an increase from 2023.
Ayo was appointed to the position by judges in the Western District of Louisiana, who were all appointed by Republican presidents, except for one. The hearing will examine both the merits of the case and a motion from the Justice Department to dismiss the case.
The FDA has so far resisted calls from pro-life lawmakers and advocates to put the in-person requirements back in place. In a filing in the case last month, the Justice Department argued that the mail-order abortion regulations do not undermine state laws and that ending the policy could undercut a safety review the FDA says that it is currently conducting into mifepristone.
The Department of Health and Human Services told The Daily Wire it does not comment on pending litigation.
Senator Bill Cassidy (R-LA), who held a hearing last month on the dangers of the abortion pill, said during the Monday call that the Trump administration should restore the in-person requirement for dispensing the pill that was in place before COVID.
Mifepristone cuts off the nutrients that an unborn child needs to survive in the womb. Another drug is then taken to expel the deceased baby from the mother.
Polling released last week by Cygnal <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/republican-voters-want-action-on-mail-order-abortion-pill-as-midterms-loom?author=Leif+Le+Mahieu&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=undefined&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=Republican+Voters+Want+Action+On+Mail-Order+Abortion+Pill+As+Midterms+Loom">showed</a> that a large majority of Republican primary voters want the FDA to take action to crack down on mail-order abortions before the 2026 midterm elections. Nearly a third of Republican primary voters said they would be less excited to vote if Republicans backed away from pro-life policies.

President Biden Holds NATO Summit News Conference As Questions Surround His Candidacy

Pro-Life Leaders Say Biden Tried To ‘Nullify’ Dobbs. The Fight Is On.

Abortion Drug

Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF)

Pro-Life Movement

Roe v. Wade's Long And Brutal Legacy

The Justice Department said Tuesday that Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations allowing the abortion pill mifepristone to be shipped through the mail do not infringe on a state’s ability to protect the unborn.
The position was taken in a <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.lawd.213952/gov.uscourts.lawd.213952.51.0_1.pdf">court filing</a> asking a judge not to grant a request from Louisiana to block the current regulations that allow mifepristone to be sent through the mail. The filing said that the FDA was currently reviewing the safety standards for mifepristone, and a ruling blocking the current standard could be “disruptive.” 
“Louisiana suffers no sovereign injury because it remains free to make and enforce its pro-life policies after Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Org,” the Justice Department said. “Nor are Defendants standing in the way of Louisiana enforcing its abortion laws against out-of- state prescribers of mifepristone.”
Louisiana and a woman named Rosalie Markezich sued the FDA last November, seeking to have a judge suspend the FDA’s current Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy standards for mifepristone. Markezich says she was coerced into taking abortion pills illegally ordered and sent into Louisiana by her ex-boyfriend. 
A White House official told The Daily Wire that nothing in the filing should be construed as the White House “defending&#8221; former President Joe Biden&#8217;s administration&#8217;s abortion drug policies.
“We’ve been very clear we have issues with that as well,” the White House official noted, saying that the Trump administration has raised issues with mifepristone, which is why it was conducting a study into mifepristone. 
“Legally speaking, it’s a question of standing,” the official said. “All we are really saying with this filing is, let’s not short-circuit this process, and let the agency, that is doing what a lot of the pro-life groups want, let them do what they’ve been tasked to do, and let that process play out.” 
As The Daily Wire <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/how-a-leftist-network-of-websites-floods-red-states-with-abortion-pills-with-no-consequences-2">previously reported</a>, leftist activists have been shipping abortion pills into states all across the country, even in red states like Louisiana, where medication abortions are technically illegal. This mailing of abortion pills, which was greenlit by the Biden administration as a COVID measure, has <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/despite-dobbs-more-babies-are-still-being-aborted-in-the-united-states">fueled an increase</a> in abortions across the country after Roe v. Wade was overturned by the Supreme Court. 
Shield laws passed in states like California and New York have been enacted, preventing Republican attorneys general from being able to prosecute the doctors sending abortion pills into their states. States like Louisiana say the FDA regulations give pro-abortion doctors the cover to ship the pills. 
Both FDA Commissioner Marty Makary and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. have said that they are conducting a study on the abortion pill, but pro-life advocates and lawmakers have demanded quicker action. 
“Given this widespread debate over the safety of mifepristone, FDA has concluded that the best path forward is for the agency to reconsider the restrictions on mifepristone based on all the evidence before the agency,” the Justice Department said on Tuesday. “As noted above, that evidence will include FDA’s own study.”
The department also said that a ruling by a judge to block the current mifepristone regulations would “threaten to short circuit the agency’s orderly review and study of the safety risks of mifepristone by asking this Court for an immediate stay of the 2023 REMS Modification approved three years ago.”
When reached for comment, the Justice Department said that it was committed to President Donald Trump&#8217;s pro-life agenda.
“This Department of Justice remains committed to advancing President Trump’s pro-life agenda, including through dismissing criminal prosecutions and civil lawsuits against peaceful pro-life advocates targeted by the previous administration, and using the FACE Act to protect pro-life pregnancy centers,&#8221; a spokesman told The Daily Wire. &#8220;In this filing, the Department of Justice simply requested more time from the court for the FDA to complete its review of mifepristone REMS. As the Supreme Court recognized in a unanimous ruling less than two years ago, it is the role of the FDA – not the federal courts – to evaluate drug safety data and impose appropriate precautions.”
The department asserted that neither Louisiana nor Markezich was facing any immediate harm from the current regulations. The Alliance Defending Freedom, which is defending Markezich, disagreed. 
“Since Roe v. Wade was overturned in 2022, the Biden-era abortion-by-mail scheme has allowed thousands of abortion drugs to flow into Louisiana each year. We&#8217;re calling on the FDA to put a stop to it,” ADF wrote on X. “Yesterday, they submitted their reply brief in our lawsuit, Louisiana v. FDA. With [Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill] we’re asking the Court to end illegal mail-order abortions now. They agree that Biden’s scheme is unlawful, but they want to spend another year or more conducting a study. Justice delayed is justice denied. Stand with Rosalie and the State of Louisiana.”
Murrill <a href="https://x.com/AGLizMurrill/status/2016566792412365188">said</a> that the filing shows that the FDA admits the current regulations are “flawed but claims that Louisiana can’t sue to stop the 1,000 dangerous abortions a month in Louisiana that the REMS allows. That is an affront to our sovereignty and the dignity of women and the unborn. FDA should stand with us for life, not with [Gavin Newsom] and [Kathy Hochul].”
The filing was also criticized by Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, which has called for Makary’s ousting over his handling of the abortion pill study. 
“Today’s denial of justice by the DOJ is completely unacceptable. It slams the door on women like Rosalie Markezich and their babies, who are suffering very real harm as the Trump-Vance administration refuses to reimplement basic guardrails on deadly mail-order abortion drugs,” said SBA Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser. “Abortion drugs accessible by mail are killing more Americans than fentanyl, cocaine or heroin combined.”
The FDA told The Daily Wire that it does not comment on pending litigation as a matter of policy.

HHS Secretary RFK Jr. Holds Press Conference On Protecting Children From Harmful Medical Interventions

FDA Claims Mail-Order Abortion Policies Are Not Preventing States From Protecting The Unborn

FDA Says Mail-Order Abortion Policies Not Preventing States From Protecting The Unborn

Abortion

Department of Justice

President Donald Trump announced on Sunday night that Louisiana Republican Governor Jeff Landry will serve as special envoy to Greenland as the president keeps his sights set on the large mineral-rich territory.
Trump <a href="https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/115760829286615399">said</a> that Landry, who previously served as a U.S. congressman and Louisiana&#8217;s attorney general, &#8220;understands how essential Greenland is to our National Security, and will strongly advance our Country’s Interests for the Safety, Security, and Survival of our Allies, and indeed, the World.&#8221; Landry said his appointment as special envoy to Greenland will not interfere with his job as governor.
“Thank you @realDonaldTrump!&#8221; Landry <a href="https://x.com/LAGovJeffLandry/status/2002950029494124986">wrote</a> on X. &#8220;It’s an honor to serve you in this volunteer position to make Greenland a part of the U.S. This in no way affects my position as Governor of Louisiana!&#8221;
After making a strong push to acquire Greenland earlier this year, the Trump administration has said little about the proposal, but the president has not forgotten about his goals for the northern territory that sits in a strategic position between North America and Russia.
Trump <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-absolutely-considering-annexing-greenland-i-dont-take-anything-off-the-table">said</a> in March that he was discussing with his advisers ways the United States could take over Greenland, such as purchasing it from Denmark, and gave “100%” certainty that “we’ll get Greenland.” Greenland is currently a territory of Denmark but operates as a somewhat autonomous country.
“You have ships sailing outside Greenland from Russia, from China and from many other places. And we’re not going to allow things to happen that are going to be — that are going to hurt the world or the United States,” Trump added at the time.
After Trump appointed Landry as special envoy on Sunday night, leaders in Greenland and Denmark expressed concern that Trump was once again making moves in his plan to take over the territory.
&#8220;We have said it before. Now, we say it again. National borders and the sovereignty of states are rooted in international law,” Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenland Premier Jens-Frederik Nielsen said in a joint statement, according to the <a href="https://apnews.com/article/denmark-greenland-trump-landry-special-envoy-7df618b975f25f7a606ec84f6d82bff9">Associated Press</a>. “They are fundamental principles. You cannot annex another country. Not even with an argument about international security.”
<a class="c-link" href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial&amp;utm_campaign=christmas&amp;utm_content=christmassale25" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial&amp;utm_campaign=christmas&amp;utm_content=christmassale25" data-sk="tooltip_parent" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-5031">Christmas Sale &#8211; Get 40% off New DailyWire+ Annual Memberships</a>
&#8220;Greenland belongs to the Greenlanders and the U.S. shall not take over Greenland,” the two leaders added. “We expect respect for our joint territorial integrity.”
The Trump administration argues that Greenland is vital to U.S. national security, while it could also provide the United States with rare earth minerals and oil. The Trump administration also wants to gain an advantage over Russia and China, which have both sought to influence and use Greenland for their own interests.

Donald Trump, Jeff Landry

Trump Taps Republican Governor As Special Envoy To Greenland: ‘Make Greenland A Part Of The U.S.’

Trump Taps Republican Governor As Special Envoy To Greenland: 'Make Greenland A Part Of The U.S.'

Donald Trump

Greenland

Jeff Landry

Trump Administration

Group Photograph Of U.S. Supreme Court Justices

Could This Supreme Court Case Permanently Destroy The Democrats?

Blacks

Ketanji Brown Jackson

Matt Walsh

Opinion

Sonia Sotomayor

Voting

Voting Rights

Whites

Louisiana sued the FDA this week for allowing the unfettered mailing of abortion drugs across the country.
The suit, <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.lawd.213952/gov.uscourts.lawd.213952.1.0.pdf">filed</a> Monday by Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill, accused the FDA of enabling leftist activists to mail abortion pills into states like Louisiana, where chemical abortions are illegal. Murrill asked the court to strike down the FDA’s approval during the Biden administration of mail-order abortion pills.
“Every year, doctors and activists in states like California and New York mail a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved abortion drug called mifepristone to thousands of Louisiana residents for the express purpose of causing abortions in Louisiana that are blatantly unlawful,” the suit said. “This extra-territorial mailing of abortion drugs is illegal under state law—and it is the direct result of the Biden Administration’s 2023 agency action expressly facilitating this scheme. That action is the subject of this lawsuit.”
In 2023, the Biden administration changed the Risk Evaluation Mitigation Strategy (REMS) for mifepristone, the drug used in over 60% of all abortions, allowing it to be sent through the mail.
Mifepristone works by starving an unborn child to death by cutting it off from the necessary nutrients provided by its mother. A different drug is then taken to induce labor and expel the deceased baby.
Murrill argued in the suit that the FDA’s regulations for mifepristone are “arbitrary and capricious” and violate the Comstock Act, a federal law that bans the mailing of abortion drugs. Joining the suit was Rosalie Markezich, a woman who says her boyfriend ordered illegal abortion pills from California and was then pressured into taking them to end the life of her unborn child.
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_campaign=fall40&amp;utm_content=fallsale&amp;utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Get 40% off new DailyWire+ annual memberships with code FALL40 at checkout!</a>
In response to a request for comment on the suit, the Department of Health and Human Services said that it does not comment on pending litigation. HHS did point The Daily Wire to its commitment to conducting a study on the reported adverse effects of mifepristone.
“The Biden administration removed mifepristone’s in-person dispensing rule without studying the safety risks. We are filling that gap. Last month, I joined [FDA Commissioner Marty Makary] in writing to state attorneys general, pledging to review all the evidence — including real-world outcomes — on the safety of this drug. Recent studies already point to serious risks when mifepristone is used without proper medical oversight,” HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. <a href="https://x.com/SecKennedy/status/1973866621245567344">said</a> earlier this month.
The suit comes after pro-life advocates were <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/pro-lifers-demand-answers-from-trump-admin-after-shocking-abortion-pill-approval?author=Leif+Le+Mahieu&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=undefined&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=Pro-Lifers+Demand+Answers+From+Trump+Admin+After+‘Shocking’+Abortion+Pill+Approval">shocked</a> last week after the FDA approved a new generic mifepristone pill. Fifty-two Republican senators sent a <a href="https://justthenews.com/sites/default/files/2025-10/2025.10.09%20-%20Letter%20from%20Senator%20Graham%20et%20al%20to%20HHS%20and%20FDA%20re%20Mifepristone.pdf">letter</a> on Thursday to the FDA and HHS urging them to scrap the regulations that allow the mailing of abortion drugs.
The FDA has said that it was required by law to approve the new generic drug and noted that it was conducting a review of the Biden guidelines. On a press call on Wednesday, SBA Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser said she was skeptical of that reasoning.
“This standard only seems to apply to this particular drug. It [has] certainly not been the standard for other drugs where there were questions that needed to be asked, that needed to get answers from those that were developing the drugs,” she said.

Menu