With legislative sessions underway, state policy updates have been categorized via theme instead of individual state. See “Promising Expansions to TMAB Access” (AZ, CO, CT, FL, MO, MI, MT, NC, NY, SC, VA, MD, MN, SD) and “Rollbacks & Threats to TMAB Access” (MO, MT, NE, KY, WY,) as well as updates to Federal Policy.
View update in full newsletterIntroduced H.B. 2463 to repeal any existing restrictions concerning the use of telemedicine for abortion care. This would reverse Arizona’s explicit ban on telehealth for medication abortion.
Democratic lawmakers introduced SB25-129 expanding Colorado’s existing laws by:
This bill supports telehealth providers based in Colorado whose patients live in or travel to an abortion banned state.
Introduced H.B.7039 mandating the Insurance Commissioner to conduct studies on telehealth coverage and reimbursement for Connecticut students who are out-of-state for university students reimbursement, with reports due by February 1, 2026. These studies are designed to help ensure that TMAB is covered for CT residents when these students receive care when out of state.
Rep. Anna Eskamani (D) introduced FL H.B. 823 which removes the explicit TMAB ban and the requirement for in-person dispensing of medication abortion. It also repeals the collection of patient immigration status data in hospitals, and mandates Medicaid reimbursement for medically necessary treatments related to TMAB. While this bill is unlikely to pass, it is critical Given the state legislative and executive makeup, the bill is unlikely to become law.
A court ruling in December struck Missouri's abortion ban as unconstitutional after the state passed Amendment 3 in November. Missouri lawmakers introduced a new resolution that, if passed, would undo the protections of Amendment 3 and reinstate a total abortion ban with narrow exceptions for rape, incest, medical emergencies, and serious fetal anomalies. While a number of restrictions were overturned, the 72 hour waiting period remains in place, making TMAB possible, although only through hybrid care.
Litigation Update: A trial has begun over Michigan’s abortion restrictions—including a 24-hour waiting period—now that abortion rights are codified in the state’s constitution. Arguments in a legal challenge to abortion restrictions that remain on the books in Michigan before a Michigan Court of Claims judge. Virtual-only (also known as direct to patient) TMAB is currently permitted in Michigan as the 24-hour waiting period law is currently blocked by a preliminary ruling.
Litigation Update: On March 12, a Montana district court permanently blocked restrictions preventing non-physician practitioners from providing abortion care, prohibiting direct-to-patient TMAB for Medicaid patients and preventing Medicaid patients from having coverage of abortion care in most circumstances.
Last December, a North Dakota state judge struck down the state’s abortion ban as unconstitutional. In January, the court rejected a request to allow the law to take effect pending the repeal, meaning that the ban will remain blocked. The case will continue to be litigated, but in the meantime TMAB can continue to be provided via hybrid-care in North Carolina.
The South Carolina Supreme Court heard arguments over their “fetal heartbeat” ban in February. The issue is whether or not “fetal cardiac activity” begins at 6 weeks or at nine weeks. Still, South Carolina has an explicit ban on telehealth for medication abortion.
Introduced S.B. 1041 establishing telehealth sexual assault forensic examinations, allowing health care providers to conduct examinations under the supervision of a sexual assault forensic examiner when one is not readily available. The admissibility of evidence collected through telehealth examinations is ensured, provided it meets general evidence rules. Virginia provides funding for abortion care in cases of rape or inscest. In states where abortion care can only be provided in the case of rape or incest, using telehealth to perform a forensic examine can offer survivors a more discreet and less invasive route to care.
MD S.B.0372 is making its way through the legislature. The “Preserve Telehealth Access Act of 2025” outlines provisions to enhance telehealth services by removing previous limitations on audio-only telephone conversations, which are now permanently included under the definition of "telehealth" for reimbursement and coverage purposes by Maryland Medicaid and certain insurers, ensuring payment parity for telehealth visits, including audio-only. The act is set to take effect on June 1, 2025.
Introduced MN H.F.1278 establishing a Reproductive Health Equity Grant Fund in Minnesota, aimed at ensuring access to abortion care across the state. This one-time grant is designed to provide financial support to abortion providers, government entities, and nonprofit organizations that primarily facilitate access to abortion services. The fund will support the infrastructure of abortion care, including the recruitment and retention of staff, patient navigators, billing consultants, and investments in technology including telehealth.
Introduced H.B.1111 which makes an appropriation for grants to support the purchase of telehealth kiosks. While abortion is banned in South Dakota, telehealth kiosks can serve as an innovative model to expand care.
State Policy Trend Update: TRAP laws have taken a new turn: whereas they once focused on in-clinic requirements, such as onerous zoning laws and building permits, they are now specifically targeting telehealth and medication abortion pills.
A court ruling in December struck Missouri's abortion ban as unconstitutional after the state passed Amendment 3 in November. Missouri lawmakers introduced a new resolution that, if passed, would undo the protections of Amendment 3 and reinstate a total abortion ban with narrow exceptions for rape, incest, medical emergencies, and serious fetal anomalies. While a number of restrictions were overturned, the 72 hour waiting period remains in place, making TMAB possible, although only through hybrid care.
A proposed law would give embryos legal status from the moment of conception, banning abortion (and telehealth for medication abortion) outright, increasing pregnancy criminalization, and interfering with access to IVF TMAB is currently allowed in Montana.
Lawmakers introduced LB 512 which would legally mandate medically unnecessary barriers to obtaining medication abortion care, including Rh testing, in-person visitation, and documentation and reporting requirements. Nebraska already requires the physical presence of a provider for abortion care, effectively banning virtual care.
In March, Texas lawmakers introduced HB 5510/2025, a first of its kind bill, prohibiting providing information on “method for obtaining” pills generally and targets people who “create, edit, upload, publish, host, maintain, or register a domain name for an Internet website … that assists or facilitates a person's effort in obtaining an abortion-inducing drug. This bill directly targets websites that share information about telehealth for medication abortion.
Introduced H.B.759 which would amend Kentucky's abortion laws by defining medical terms, setting conditions for permissible abortions, requiring informed consent and ultrasounds, detailing documentation and reporting requirements, and protecting health care providers' rights, without specifying new funding allocations. Unnecessary reporting both risks patient and provider safety, increases criminalization risk, and places onerous barriers to telehealth abortion care.
Passed a law requiring women seeking medication abortion to undergo an invasive transvaginal ultrasound. Governor Mark Gordon vetoed this bill, but the veto was overridden by the legislature, and the law was enacted. While WY had allowed telehealth to be used for abortion care, this ultrasound requirement makes it unlikely that direct to patient care could be possible unless a patient has access to an at-home ultrasound machine.
