led by aaron holly, whose husband is republican senator joshua holly, a group of conservative christian lawyers calling themselves allies defending freedom, pushed the courts conservative justices to ban the use of mifepristone after seven weeks of pregnancy and revoke the fda's 2021 decision to allow mifepristone to be mailed after a telehealth appointment. holly and her group are some of the same lawyers who helped argue the dobbs case which overturned roe v wade and that is no coincidence. there's a reason the group behind dobbs is now targeting her persona. that's because this right the patchwork of states that band abortion after dobbs in 2022, the number of abortions in the u.s. increased the following year, but the reason for that is largely telehealth. it's allowing women to still access abortion medication through the mail. pills were used in two thirds of abortions last year, when we saw the increase. the antiabortion movement knows this and does not like it so they want to do everything they can to stop it. this is why they are now targeting the purpose and targeting teleheal

and basically, aaron holly said there are seven doctors who have conscientious objections and might bet at some point, one of the doctors patient is might take mifepristone and that may cause a side effect like a headache and that may cause the person to be-- to go to the emergency room. and if that person goes to the emergency room it may be that person will need to be treated and if the treatment is necessary it may be that one of the seven doctors is the person treating it. that is a ridiculous chain of causation that doesn't work in any aspect of the law and i don't think it worked in the supreme court today. justice on left and right wing just expressed massive skepticism about this, so i think that's were the case will be decided. >> to the second part, the issues of judges and science. there was an exchange on this and it's relevant so i want to play for our viewers this exchange because the video begins with justice jackson. >> do you have concerns about judges pursing medical and scientific studies? >> yes your honor, i think we have significant concerns about that. you have a