Sign up for Executive Dysfunction, a newsletter that highlights one under-the-radar story each week about how Trump is changing the law—or how the law is pushing back. You’ll also receive updates on the latest from Slate’s Jurisprudence team.

The Supreme Court restored telehealth access to abortion pills on Thursday in an emergency order that provoked seething dissents from Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. With just the two noted dissents, the court halted a decision by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that had prohibited providers across the country from prescribing and mailing mifepristone through telemedicine. Blue states have preserved access to this drug, the first used in a medication abortion, by authorizing their providers to prescribe and mail the pills across state lines. At Louisiana’s request, the 5th Circuit had tried to halt this flow from mifepristone into states that criminalize reproductive health care, but SCOTUS has kept the pipeline open—for now. In dissent, Thomas accused these providers of participating in a “criminal enterprise” and implied that they should be imprisoned. Alito, meanwhile, fumed that blue states had undermined his decision overturning Roe v. Wade by outsmarting anti-abortion lawmakers.

On this week’s Slate Plus bonus episode of Amicus, co-host Mark Joseph Stern discussed Thursday’s decision with Madiba Dennie, deputy editor of Balls and Strikes and author of The Originalism Trap. An excerpt of their conversation about Thomas and Alito’s dissents, below, has been edited for length and clarity.

Mark Joseph Stern: Let’s start with Thomas’ dissent, which was insane. He suggested that abortion providers who mail mifepristone should be thrown in prison rather than granted relief by the Supreme Court. He claimed: “It is a criminal offense to ship mifepristone for use in abortions.” And he added that the drug’s manufacturers “are not entitled........

© Slate