Assembly committee advances bill to protect access to medication abortion and shield providers

AB 260, a bill to protect access to medication abortion and to shield California health‑care providers from certain federal interference, was advanced out of the Assembly Appropriations Committee on May 14, 2025.

Assembly Majority Leader Ayear Curry, the bill’s presenter, told the committee the measure "protects and safeguard[s] safe and legal, reproductive health care here in California." Curry framed the bill as a response to post‑Dobbs restrictions in other states and to federal actions that supporters say have reduced funding and threatened clinical practice.

Angela Pontes, senior vice president for government affairs at Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, testified as a cosponsor and described the medication covered by the bill. "AB 260 safeguards access to medication abortion in California by protecting against federal interference with the current practice of medicine in this state," Pontes said, adding that the bill "increases access to reproductive health care through telehealth" and removes provider names from mifepristone prescription labels.

Supporters told the committee that medication abortion is widely used and clinically safe, and that the bill’s fiscal effects are "mostly minor and absorbable," language that also appears in the committee analysis. Multiple advocacy organizations and medical groups signed on as cosponsors or supporters and were recorded at the hearing.

No primary witnesses in opposition were reported in the hearing record. The author closed by asking for an "aye" vote; the clerk recorded the item as moved out of committee "on a b roll call." The transcript records the committee motion and that the bill was placed on the roll call, but does not include a full roll‑call tally in the hearing excerpt.

Why it matters: Supporters say AB 260 would preserve patient access to a commonly used medication (mifepristone) and reduce legal exposure for clinicians in California amid changing federal and out‑of‑state restrictions. The committee analysis cited a small, absorbable fiscal impact.

What’s next: The bill was moved off the committee’s immediate calendar and recorded as advanced on a committee roll call; further committee scheduling or floor action was not recorded in the excerpt.