Government · Baton Rouge, LA Metro · October 1, 2026
Three Pro-Life States Sue New York, California, Massachusetts Over Abortion Pills
What Alinsky tactic is being used
3 of the thirteen rules are in play here — campaigns rarely run just one.
Rule 11
“If you push a negative hard and deep enough, it will break through into its counterside.”
The pressure here is rhetorical overreach on both sides. The Supreme Court complaint reportedly likens mailing abortion pills to anthrax, mail bombs and chemical weapons, while New York's attorney general calls the suit "certain to fail" before a single brief has been answered. Each statement pushes a true underlying claim past what the record can carry, and the exaggeration becomes the story instead of the substance.
Counter-Rule 11 · Proportional Truth
Refuse to overclaim, even where it would help. One exaggeration hands the other side the only weapon that works permanently.
When you talk about this case, use only what the filings and published data actually say: two suits filed around Sept. 30, 2026, one at the Supreme Court against three states, one in the Western District of Louisiana against the named providers and organizations. Refuse to repeat the anthrax comparison, even though it is in the complaint, and refuse to say the Court has 'taken the case' when it has not yet decided whether to hear it. Keep a one-page file of sourced facts and use that when asked.
Rule 4
“Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.”
Murrill's core argument is the opponents' own rulebook turned around: Dobbs returned abortion regulation to the states, and she says the shield-law states are nullifying that same principle inside Louisiana's borders. The defendant states, in turn, invoke their own sovereignty to justify protecting their licensed providers. This only works where the gap between stated principle and practice is real, which is why the federalism language is doing the heavy lifting on both sides.
Counter-Rule 4 · Radical Integrity
Close the gap between stated values and actual practice before anyone else finds it. This tactic only works where the gap is real.
Close the gap on your own side first. Before quoting the complaint's safety allegations, read what your state's own health department or pharmacy board has published about mifepristone and misoprostol, including their use in miscarriage management, so your claims match your state's records. If your state demands that other states respect its laws, be ready to say plainly that it accepts the same limit in reverse. Write down the two or three facts you can document, and stop there.
Rule 1
“Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.”
Both offices are trading claims about strength that nobody has yet counted. One side describes a shielded 'drug-dealing network'; the other announces in advance that the lawsuit cannot succeed. The reader is handed two phantom armies and no figures.
Counter-Rule 1 · Reality Over Perception
Count the actual numbers. The phantom army depends on nobody checking whether it exists.
Count what is countable this month. Ask your attorney general's office how many mailed-pill complaints it has received and how many cases it has actually opened, and look up how many states have shield laws versus how many specifically cover telehealth prescribing into ban states. Write the numbers in a notebook with dates and sources, and when someone at church repeats a figure, ask where it came from before you pass it on.
Chapter 3 sets out the rules; Chapter 15 answers each of them in turn. This is that pairing applied to this story.
Know where you stand
The free 4-minute assessment identifies your mountain and your institution’s capture phase — so alerts like this one arrive matched to where you actually stand.
Facing this yourself? Ask. Describe what is happening and get what the book, Scripture, and the law of your state say, with the exact words to use. Your first one is free.