Liability is separate from access limitations. If it happens at all, it happens after the fact.
I try and stay out of the abortion debate. I'm not taking a side on that underlying contentious issue here because I don't want to be sucked into an emotional debate on my Sunday.
But unlike surgical abortions, the law is essentially powerless at effectively limiting the availability of abortion inducing drugs in a meaningful way regardless of what it says.
This is true regardless of where one stands on the whole pro or anti ability to legally kill your baby debate we often have in this country.
All I'm saying here is that the law is powerless at preventing access to abortion inducing drugs in any meaningful way. They are and will be available and easy enough to obtain, in one form or another, regardless of legality.
Which means, for the "don't kill your baby" side of the debate, it's to be had at social, cultural, religious, family, and individual levels rather than legal ones.
I don't support making drug makers liable any more than gun manufacturers. I don't support punishing mothers who kill their unborn children for the act, and even if I did there's no way to know they did so without violating a whole host of privacy concerns.
I know I sound wildly pro-choice here, but I say this as someone who was opposed to Roe my entire life, celebrated it's overturn, and believes elective abortions outside of urgent medical necessity after a certain point of pregnancy are moral abominations.