Justices were skeptical of abortion pills arguments. Anti-abortion groups have backup plans.

Anti-abortion activists and elected officials have a backup plan should the Supreme Court reject their arguments for nationwide restrictions on the abortion pill mifepristone. In fact, they have several.

The lawsuit that went before the high court Tuesday challenging federal regulation of abortion pills is just one piece of the movement’s strategy to curb access to the drugs — a conservative goal since before Roe fell and the medication gained popularity. The sprawling and loosely-coordinated tactics include other legal challenges in state and federal courts, state and federal legislation, executive orders, pressure campaigns against pharmacies that dispense the pills, and the use of environmental and wildlife laws.

These strategies are likely to take on greater importance after the Supreme Court’s skeptical reception of a challenge to FDA decisions loosening access to abortion pills. During oral arguments, Justices Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett — two pivotal votes in the case — expressed doubts about the harms anti-abortion physicians claimed they’ve faced when treating patients who have taken abortion pills and needed follow-up care. The two justices also questioned whether curtailing access to the drug nationwide would be an overly broad remedy.

“We’re not putting all our chips on this one case,” said Jesse Southerland, the federal policy director for Americans United for Life. “Since chemical abortion is making up the majority of abortions, it has to be a priority.”