In a week marked by heated debate and passionate advocacy, Texas lawmakers moved closer to enacting a first-of-its-kind law that would allow private citizens to sue out-of-state providers who send abortion pills into the state—a move that could set off a new wave of legal battles across the country. Meanwhile, in Georgia, grassroots efforts to maintain abortion access are gaining momentum, as hundreds rallied to raise funds for women seeking procedures in the wake of tightening restrictions since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade three years ago.
On August 28, 2025, the Texas House passed a bill that, if approved by the Republican-dominated Senate and signed by Governor Greg Abbott, would give almost any private citizen the right to sue individuals or organizations outside Texas who provide or mail abortion pills to state residents. According to the Associated Press, this measure represents an unprecedented escalation in the ongoing fight over abortion access, targeting the widespread use of medication abortions that have become the most common method in the United States—especially in states where abortion is otherwise banned.
The bill, which mirrors a controversial 2021 Texas law that enabled private citizens to enforce abortion bans through civil lawsuits, would impose a penalty of $100,000 on providers. However, only the pregnant woman, the man who impregnated her, or close relatives could collect the full amount. Others bringing lawsuits would receive $10,000, with the remainder directed to charity. The measure also includes provisions to prevent those with a history of family violence from collecting rewards and to shield women’s personal and medical information from being disclosed in court documents.
Supporters argue the bill is necessary to protect women and unborn children from what they describe as the dangers of chemical abortion drugs. Amy O’Donnell, spokesperson for Texas Alliance for Life, told the Associated Press, “We believe that women need to be protected from the harms of chemical abortion drugs. They harm women and their intent is to harm unborn babies.”
But critics are alarmed by the bill’s reach and its potential to spark interstate legal chaos. Anna Rupani, executive director of Fund Texas Choice—a group that helps women travel out of state for abortions—warned, “It establishes a bounty hunting system to enforce Texas’ laws beyond the state laws.” Legal experts agree that if the bill becomes law and is enforced, it will likely trigger a fresh round of litigation over whether one state can enforce its laws on providers in another. “It’s very different from what’s come before it,” said Greer Donley, a University of Pittsburgh law professor who studies abortion laws, as quoted by the Associated Press.
Already, legal skirmishes are underway. Dr. Maggie Carpenter, a New York-based physician, faces criminal charges in Louisiana for prescribing abortion pills to a pregnant minor and has been ordered by a Texas judge to pay a $100,000 penalty for violating that state’s ban on telemedicine abortions. However, New York officials have refused to extradite her or enforce the Texas judgment—a preview, perhaps, of the kind of state-versus-state standoffs that could become commonplace if the Texas bill is enacted.
While Republican-led states like Texas and Florida are seeking to further restrict access to abortion medication, many Democratic-led states are moving in the opposite direction. At least eight states have enacted laws to shield their own providers who send abortion pills to women in states where abortion is banned, setting the stage for a patchwork of conflicting statutes and mounting legal uncertainty.
The battle over abortion pills is also playing out on the federal stage. Texas and Florida recently asked to join a lawsuit—originally filed by the Republican attorneys general of Idaho, Kansas, and Missouri—that seeks to force the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to roll back its approval and restrict access to mifepristone, the primary drug used in medication abortions. Opponents argue that mifepristone is too risky to prescribe via telehealth, while proponents point to its long safety record. In fact, this week, more than 260 reproductive health researchers from across the country submitted a letter to the FDA affirming the drug’s safety and urging the agency not to impose new restrictions. The letter called for decisions to be based on “gold-standard science.”
Back in Georgia, the struggle for abortion rights has taken on a different tenor—one marked by grassroots organizing, fundraising, and community solidarity. On August 23, 2025, more than 200 women gathered in Chamblee for a sold-out event supporting the Red Tent Fund, a nonprofit founded in 2024 to provide direct financial assistance for abortion procedures. The event raised $17,000, which will help women in Georgia and beyond access abortions—often a prohibitively expensive procedure, with costs around $600 depending on the method, according to the Red Tent Fund’s founder, Allison Tombros Korman.
Korman, speaking to Rough Draft Atlanta, emphasized the urgency of their mission: “Funding for abortion has never been more critical than it is in this moment.” She explained that abortion is one of the few medical procedures where patients are expected to pay upfront, putting it out of reach for many. “That’s why abortion funds were created,” she said.
The Red Tent Fund, which has already served more than 800 women in 33 states and aims to provide $500,000 in direct funding this year, is rooted in Jewish values that affirm the right to abortion. More than 80 percent of Jewish adults in the U.S. support abortion access, making them the most supportive religious group in Georgia, according to Rough Draft Atlanta. Yet, as Korman pointed out, recipients of the Red Tent Fund’s aid do not need to identify as Jewish; the goal is simply to ensure that no one is forced to choose between their identity and their right to reproductive health care.
The Chamblee event featured a panel of Jewish experts in law, public health, and women’s health, as well as Georgia State Representative Esther Panitch, who updated attendees on the ongoing legal battle over the state’s six-week abortion ban. Panitch urged the crowd to engage with their representatives, especially Republicans in metro areas facing tough reelection battles. “We need everyone to show up. We need you to call your representatives, especially if they are Republicans in the metro area, and lean on them,” she said. “Tell them how this impacts you, because in the metro they are going to have a hard time with this issue going into their next election.”
Panelists and attendees alike stressed the deeply personal nature of the fight for abortion rights, with high school student Hannah Throne sharing that she was raised with the philosophy of “My body, my choice.” Korman summed up the community’s resolve: “We are entitled to access our reproductive rights in alignment with the way that we live as Jews. We have been leaders in this field. We are abortion providers, we run clinics, we are politicians, we are researchers, we are philanthropists. And nobody gets to tell us that we don’t have a seat at the table for an issue that we have been leading on for as long as we have.”
As the legislative and legal landscape shifts, the fight over abortion access in America is being waged on multiple fronts—from courtrooms and statehouses to community halls and fundraising events. The next chapter, it seems, will require both legal ingenuity and grassroots determination.
