The Brief

A California bill that would allow health care providers to anonymously mail abortion drugs could soon become law, marking the latest effort by a blue state to safeguard access to medication abortion. 

The two-drug regimen of mifepristone and misoprostol is used in more than 60% of abortions in the U.S., and roughly a quarter of abortions are now done via telehealth, according to the Society of Family Planning. 
 
Under the measure, which the legislature is considering this week, doctors, pharmacists and others authorized to prescribe the drugs to end a pregnancy could leave their name off the prescription label. 

Abortion rights advocates say the measure adds to protections already on the books under the state's existing shield law, one of a handful nationwide that protects doctors who mail abortion pills out of state by shielding them from extradition and other legal actions from states with abortion bans. 

According to recent studies, shield laws have expanded abortion access – roughly 12,000 abortions a month are provided under the laws, the vast majority to patients living in the nearly two dozen states that ban or severely restrict the procedure. 

Now, as legal attacks against telehealth providers put shield laws to the test, some states have moved to strengthen the laws by allowing providers to prescribe anonymously, reducing their risk of legal or individual harassment.  To date, five states  — New York, Maine, Massachusetts, Vermont, and Washington — have passed these laws, while a similar bill in Pennsylvania is currently in committee.
 
"We've now had a solid two years of shield law provision, and like a lot of things, with real-world experience, we've identified areas [of the law] that can be strengthened or made more explicit," said Dr. Angel Foster, a co-founder of the Massachusetts Medication Abortion Access Project, a clinic near Boston that mails pills to patients in states with abortion bans. Massachusetts passed its bill allowing anonymous prescribing of abortion pills in early August. 

Recent legal attacks against doctors in New York and California, have put shield laws to the test. So far, they've worked as intended, says Greer Donley, a law professor at the University of Pittsburgh who has advised legislators across the country on crafting shield laws. "But it's clear that anti-abortion advocates are going to be looking very hard for additional cases they can bring." 

Removing the name of the provider from the label on the package adds another layer of protection, she says. "It makes it a lot harder to find the person you're trying to target." And protecting doctors can ensure that patients have access to abortions.

Opponents of abortion counter that shield laws have turned those states into safe havens for criminal activity. 

"So-called shield laws are yet another tactic abortion activists use to exploit the FDA's reckless mail-order abortion scheme," said Erik Baptist, senior counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom, the Christian legal advocacy group that led the fight to overturn Roe v. Wade in 2022. "These shield laws are designed to obstruct other states from protecting unborn babies and their mothers against the dangers of abortion drugs." 

California's key role in abortion access

If California passes this law, it could shape access to medication abortion for patients across the country, reproductive health advocates say. That's because California-based pharmacies have come to play a pivotal role in the distribution of abortion pills nationwide. 

Few shield law providers mail mifepristone themselves, with most relying instead on pharmacies in California. 

"We're really the main hub for mailing abortion pills," said Jessica Nouhavandi, lead pharmacist and co-founder of the online pharmacy Honeybee Health, which was the first U.S.-based online pharmacy to ship abortion pills directly to patients and remains the nation's largest distributor of mailed abortion pills. "Almost everything comes out of California, and mainly from Honeybee." 

One reason for that is the sheer amount of work required to dispense mifepristone, which is tightly regulated by the Food and Administration under special rules known as a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, or REMS. 

"The REMS really requires providers to be clinicians but also pharmacists," said Anna Fiastro, a researcher in family medicine at the University of Washington and a co-founder of Access, Delivered, a UW-affiliated research initiative that works to advance telehealth medication abortion services across the U.S. "On top of their clinical duties, providers have to order, stock and store the medication, which are all steps they're not taking to prescribe other medications."

The California bill, AB 260, would remove not only the name of the prescribing clinician, but also that of the patient receiving the medication and the pharmacy that mails it, effectively extending California's protections to providers across the country. 

"We're being asked to carry out standard-of-care medicine under the constant threat of legal harassment," Nouhavandi said. "This bill doesn't just protect providers legally — it's a statement that we're not alone. And that matters, because access to care only exists if there are people still willing to provide it." 

Legal attacks target telehealth providers

Recent legal attacks against a New York-based physician, Margaret Carpenter, have underscored the reality of those threats. In February, a Texas judge ruled against Carpenter in a civil suit brought by attorney general Ken Paxton, ordering her to stop prescribing and sending abortion pills to patients in Texas and imposing a penalty of more than $100,000.

Then, in January, Carpenter was indicted by a grand jury in Louisiana for allegedly prescribing abortion pills to a pregnant minor and charged with criminal abortion by means of abortion-inducing drugs. 

The indictment, the first issued against a U.S. doctor for providing abortion pills across state lines, came just months after Louisiana's Republican governor Jeff Landry signed a law reclassifying mifepristone and misoprostol as "controlled dangerous substances." Data from hundreds of studies and clinical trials and 24 years of approved use has shown that the pills are safe and effective, whether dispensed in person or via telemedicine. 

On Feb. 11, Landry signed an extradition warrant for Carpenter, though New York's Democratic governor Kathy Hochul has said she won't extradite Carpenter, citing New York's "strict shield laws that anticipate this very situation." Experts say both of the cases are likely to end up in front of the Supreme Court.
Still, advocates say the updates to California's law can't come soon enough. 

"This is really, really urgent," said a New York-based physician who spoke on the condition of anonymity due to the threat of legal actions. The physician is one of a handful of U.S. providers working on behalf of the Europe-based nonprofit Aid Access, the largest organization of shield law providers.  

"We're prescribing 12,000 pills a month to people all over the country," they said. "We need to get our names off these labels so that we don't have to live in fear." 

And that may be the real goal of cases like Carpenter's, says Farah Diaz-Tello, senior counsel and legal director at reproductive health advocacy group If/When/How: to scare and intimidate people in the hope that they'll be too afraid of possible legal action and give up. 

Copyright 2025 NPR

The FBI seized about 15 drones near SoFi Stadium and L.A. Memorial Coliseum on Friday and Saturday for violating temporary flight restrictions, Amir Ehsaei, special agent in charge of counterterrorism and crisis response at the FBI's Los Angeles Field Office, told LAist. Multiple operators were cited.

Stadiums hosting World Cup games and official fan festival venues are designated as "No Drone Zones" by the Federal Aviation Administration on match days.

“We have a zero-tolerance policy when it comes to drones violating the temporary flight restrictions," Ehsaei said.

One of the drones seized near SoFi Stadium on Friday.

(

Courtesy FBI Los Angeles

)

One of the drones seized Friday at SoFi Stadium.

(

Courtesy FBI

)

He said drone detection teams are deployed at all SoFi games. "We will be out at other places depending on the nature — the size, the scope — [and] different intelligence that we'll get based on  threat assessments."

Drones are prohibited at SoFi within a three-nautical-mile radius and up to 3,000 feet above ground level. They are also banned at the Coliseum for the official fan festival within a one-nautical-mile radius and up to 1,000 feet above ground level.

Violators could face fines of up to $100,000 and federal criminal charges.

Residents in East LA are weighing the promise of a new Metro E Line extension with concerns over construction disruptions, small-business impacts and whether more outreach is needed about the project.

The 4.7-mile extension of the Metro E Line would connect East Los Angeles to Montebello with four new stations. The project would relocate the existing Atlantic and Pomona station underground and include a mix of underground, aerial and street-level track transit.

The $7.9 billion project is expected to open for service between 2035 and 2037, according to Metro.

Construction will begin in 2029 and last approximately eight to 10 years, pending full funding approval. It’s part of a wider plan to connect the E Line to the city of Whittier, though officials say the work will be built in two phases due to funding constraints.

While officials say the project is intended to reduce traffic congestion and ease pressure on local roads, residents at a recent community meeting focused more on the immediate impact and communication.

Concerns over construction and local impact

“Thirty days for comment on a complex issue like this is ridiculous. … We need better outreach,” said East LA resident Clara Solis about a 30-day public comment period ending June 26.

Solis and others also raised concerns about how construction could affect traffic and disrupt local commerce, pointing to past transit projects.

“How is this going to impact the businesses? When the Gold Line went through, a lot of our businesses really suffered economically. We want to see a presentation on that. You should have a presentation just on how it’s going to impact the businesses,” Solis added.

A map shows the Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 project will extend the E Line nearly nine miles east from East Los Angeles to the City of Whittier. ()

(

Courtesy Metro

)

Calls for broader outreach

East LA resident Kristie Hernandez said community outreach for the project should also extend to people who do not necessarily live within the immediate 200-foot project radius.

“We need to understand that folks who don’t necessarily live within that close proximity also frequent that area when they drive,” said Hernandez.

Hernandez advocated for a 90-day public comment window and also called for presentations on underground infrastructure, especially in the wake of the East LA pipeline that was punctured during construction work in late May.

“We do not want that to happen again,” she said.

A promise for greater mobility

Lucia Martinez spoke favorably about the extension plans, considering that she relies on buses to get around East LA to do her shopping. She said she looks forward to using the Metro to travel to the Citadel as well as to the hospital in Pasadena.

“As an older woman who became aware of this project, I think it is amazing because I am someone who does not drive,” she said.

LA Documenter Rafael Cazzorla contributed reporting for this story. LA Documenters trains and pays LA residents to take notes at local government meetings around Los Angeles. You can find meeting notes and audio at losangeles.documenters.org

For the first time in nearly three decades, the Food and Drug Administration approved a new chemical UV filter for use in sunscreens sold in the U.S. And that has many dermatologists cheering.

"This is a very big deal," says Dr. Heather Rogers, a dermatologist in Seattle and a fellow of the American Academy of Dermatology.

The new ingredient is called bemotrizinol, and it has several advantages over the chemical sunscreen ingredients previously available in the U.S., Rogers says.

"It hits like really every box for us that we have been waiting for as dermatologists and consumers," Rogers says.

Here's what you need to know about this new ingredient and how it could lead to better sunscreens sold stateside.

1. It blocks both UVA and UVB rays

Rogers says in general, you want to use sunscreens that are broad spectrum, meaning they protect against both UVA rays — the longer wavelengths that cause premature aging and wrinkles — and UVB rays, which lead to sunburns. Both types of UV rays can cause skin cancer.

She says the sunscreens currently sold in the U.S. do an excellent job of protecting against UVB rays, but the chemical UV filters available in sunscreens in the U.S. until now aren't as good at blocking out UVA rays.

In general, chemical sunscreens sold in the U.S. rely on an ingredient called avobenzone to block out UVA rays, says Kelly Dobos, a cosmetic chemist who teaches at the University of Cincinnati.

But avobenzone by itself isn't photo stable, meaning its protection can start to break down rapidly when exposed to sunlight. And as avobenzone breaks down, it can release molecules that lead to skin irritation, says Alexa Friedman, a senior scientist with the nonprofit Environmental Working Group, or EWG.

By contrast, bemotrizinol offers protection against both UVA and UVB rays all on its own, and it is photo stable, so it breaks down more slowly, offering better protection, Rogers says.

"So if you go a little longer than two hours to reapply your sunscreen, there will be more protection left," Rogers says. However, she says you should still reapply sunscreen every two hours.

2. It's long been used in other countries 

Bemotrizinol has been widely used in European and Asian sunscreens for decades. But it has taken 20 years for the FDA to approve its use in this country.

That's because in the U.S., sunscreens are regulated as over-the-counter drugs rather than cosmetics, as they're classified in Europe. That means ingredients need to undergo rigorous testing for safety and efficacy before they can be approved for use in the U.S.

"It's really expensive and time consuming," Dobos says. The European company DSM-Firmenich spent at least $18 million over more than two decades in its push to gain FDA approval for bemotrizinol.

3. It has a well-documented safety profile

However, all that testing means bemotrizinol has more safety data to back it up than any other chemical sunscreen ingredient currently approved in the U.S., says Friedman of EWG.

"This ingredient is exciting because we have that data to support its safety," Friedman says.

Friedman says animal testing showed bemotrizinol doesn't lead to concerns like reproductive harm, while clinical testing on humans found that it does not irritate the skin, even after repeated application over time, "which is hopefully how people are using sunscreens."

And because bemotrizinol's molecules are larger, it's not readily absorbed by the skin and into the bloodstream, she says.

That's important, because studies have shown that some of the other chemical sunscreen UV filters sold in the U.S. can be absorbed in the bloodstream, prompting calls for more safety data and leading to a backlash against sunscreen on social media fueled by misinformation. Rogers says that trend is concerning because skin cancer is the most common form of cancer.

"We just need to have sunscreen that people will use, that they'll trust," Rogers says. "And this ingredient is going to allow that to happen. And that is very exciting."

And bemotrizinol is also considered to be non-irritating, Friedman says. That should be welcome news to people who've been put off by chemical sunscreens in the past.

4. It could lead to sunscreens that look better on you

Until now, Rogers says, the only sunscreen ingredient available in the U.S. that offered the aforementioned advantages of bemotrizinol — photo stable, non-irritating, minimally absorbed into the skin and with good broad spectrum protection against both UVA and UVB rays — was zinc oxide.

Both zinc oxide and titanium dioxide are mineral UV filters. Both chemical sunscreens and mineral sunscreens work by absorbing UV rays from the sun. Mineral sunscreens also reflect some UV rays. The bigger difference is that mineral sunscreens sit on the surface of the skin, while chemical sunscreens get absorbed into the skin, Rogers says.

The downside of mineral sunscreens is that they can leave an unattractive white cast on the skin — think of lifeguards with white paste on their noses. "Particularly if you're a person of color, zinc is going to make you look pale, white or ashy, which really makes it hard to use on a regular basis," Rogers says.

Bemotrizinol, on the other hand, is transparent on the skin, and because it protects against both UVA and UVB rays on its own, it doesn't have to be mixed with as many other chemical filters and stabilizers to achieve broad spectrum protection, Dobos adds. She says that should lead to more aesthetically pleasing, less greasy sunscreen formulations in the near future.

"I think it's a real win for public health," Dobos says. "If we can make a sunscreen that consumers like to use and want to use and apply in the proper amounts, I think that's something that's really going to be a win for consumers."

DSM-Firmenich has exclusive rights to market bemotrizinol in the U.S. for 18 months. It will be sold under the brand name Parsol Shield. The company says the first sunscreen products containing the ingredient should start hitting American store shelves around September.

The Justice Department on Friday approved Paramount's proposed $111 billion takeover of Warner Bros. Discovery.

After concluding its antitrust investigation into the pending merger, the department said in a statement that it found that the deal posed no threat to competition or consumers of film, broadcast television or streaming.

The decision clears the way for a merger of two rival Hollywood studio titans: Paramount, the owner of CBS, including CBS News, will swallow the much larger Warner, which includes HBO and CNN.

The DOJ''s Antitrust Division concluded that a union of two studio giants isn't anti-competitive because the streaming market has expanded the competition for conventional Hollywood studios, which includes Netflix, Apple and Amazon, as well as smaller streamers. The Justice Department's view is that, for the same reason, consumers won't lose out because there are plenty of other places to get entertainment.

Several states, including California, have raised antitrust concerns. The European Union is investigating as well.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta, who has been investigating the deal for antitrust violations, said in a post on social media following the Justice Department's approval: "The merger of Warner Bros and Paramount is not a done deal and remains under investigation by my office."

In a statement following the decision, Paramount described the deal as "pro-competitive," and would result in "a stronger company better positioned to compete against dominant technology platforms in an industry increasingly defined by intense competition for audiences, talent, technology, and investment."

The company said it planned to complete the merger as soon as possible, "delivering its benefits to consumers, creators, and the entertainment industry as a whole."

The consolidation will put media mogul David Ellison — son of Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison — at the helm of Warner Bros. studio as well as its cable and streaming properties, including CNN and HBO. The Ellison family took over Paramount and CBS last summer.

In the months leading up to the regulatory approval, critics in Hollywood feared the deal would consolidate an already concentrated media landscape and lead to fewer jobs and less creative content.

In April, thousands of directors, actors, writers and other industry talent — including Kristen Stewart, Pedro Pascal and Javier Bardem — signed an open letter opposing the merger.

The elder Ellison is also a financial backer and adviser to President Trump on artificial intelligence. Critics of recent changes at CBS under the Ellisons' control are concerned that, as they say has happened with CBS News, the acquisition would make CNN more friendly to Trump.

NPR's Carrie Johnson and Mandalit del Barco contributed to this story.
Copyright 2026 NPR