The Supreme Court of Texas heard arguments on Tuesday in a case brought by the Center for Reproductive Rights, challenging the state’s ban on abortion. This case could have a ripple effect across the country as courts grapple with exceptions to bans of abortion after Roe. The Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR), representing 20 patients, and
The Center for Reproductive Rights filed a lawsuit against the state’s ban on abortion on Tuesday, and the Supreme Court of Texas heard arguments in that case. The case could have an impact on the entire nation as state courts battle with exceptions to abortion bans following the downfall of Roe.
The medical exception language that currently exists in Texas ‘ abortion ban is being reevaluated by the Center for Reproductive Rights, which is speaking on behalf of 20 patients and two doctors. According to state law, abortion is permitted when the patient is at” significant risk of substantial impairment of a major biological function” or when they could die. According to the lawsuit, this language is also ambiguous and risky for pregnant women and healthcare professionals.
Related lawsuits have been filed by the organization in Tennessee, Idaho, and Oklahoma. However, the Texas case is the first instance in which a post-Roe law has been used to sue the state of Texas straight affecting expectant people.
The narrow exceptions that have accompanied abortion-restrictive laws are being highlighted by these challenges. They function as hazy asterisks that frequently leave patients and caregivers perplexed, leading to a lower standard of care for pregnant women. They are frequently referred to as “life of the mother” exceptions.
In this week’s arguments, Molly Duane, the plaintiffs ‘ senior attorney, stated that although there is technically a medical exception to the bans,” no one knows what it means and the state wo n’t tell us.”
In pregnancies with specific levels of complications, including those with devastating fetal diagnoses, a district court judge ruled this past August that the state’s nearly complete abortion ban could not be enforced. Republican-only high court justices in Texas are debating whether to support the state or uphold the lower court’s decision. The latter would indicate that in the future, challenges to ambiguous health exceptions might be successful.
Since Roe was overthrown—and yet before that in Texas—choices regarding potentially life-saving healthcare have become more complicated and uncertain. The state’s six-week abortion ban, which went into effect in 2021, served as a national model for criminalizing healthcare professionals. According to the OB-GYNs in the Texas case, the state’s exception caused “widespread confusion among the health community,” making it difficult for them and their coworkers to perform their duties effectively. The stakes are higher, medical professionals run the risk of prison time, fines, and the possible loss of their licenses if providers misinterpret exceptions and perform abortions that do not comply with the rules.
The justices ‘ decision, which Duane anticipates this summer, may not give female people and clinical teams in the state as much clarity as possible. In the interim, more plaintiffs are stepping forth to inquire about the legal implications of their pregnancy story.
These pregnancies were sought after by many of the plaintiffs who brought these cases across the nation, including Texas. Some people have huge fantasized about becoming parents, only to experience destruction when they learn of fetal anomalies or health issues during a routine check-up. The appointments in question typically occur after 18 weeks of pregnancy, and abortion bans frequently occur earlier than that. Due to these circumstances, expectant mothers and their families have much time to grieve when deciding how to proceed.
These difficult choices had to be made immediately by the women suing the state of Texas. While some people left the state to receive abortion care, others gave birth to infants who simply lived for a few seconds. Others were instructed to hold off on receiving care until they were in greater danger.
At a news conference this spring, Lauren Miller, one of the original plaintiffs, claimed that Texas politicians are banning healthcare that they do n’t understand. ” They might be able to take action.” They are certainly, though. And it’s killing us, too! The Center for Reproductive Rights filed a lawsuit against the state’s ban on abortion on Tuesday, and the Supreme Court of Texas heard arguments in that case. The case could have an impact on the entire nation as state courts struggle to decide whether or not to impose abortion bans after Roe was overthrown. 20 patients are represented by the Center for Reproductive Rights.
The Supreme Court of Texas heard arguments on Tuesday in a case brought by the Center for Reproductive Rights, challenging the state’s ban on abortion. This case could have a ripple effect across the country as courts grapple with exceptions to bans of abortion after Roe. The Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR), representing 20 patients, and
SUZANNE CORDEIRO/Getty. Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.. On Tuesday, the Supreme Court of Texas heard arguments in a suit brought by the Center for Reproductive Rights challenging the state’s abortion ban—the case could have ripple effects across the country as state courts wrestle with exceptions to abortion bans after the fall of Roe.. The Center for Reproductive Rights, representing 20 patients and two doctors, is asking the court to reconsider the medical exception language that currently exists in Texas’s abortion ban. The state’s law calls for “reasonable medical judgment” and permits abortion if the patient could die or if they’re at “serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function.” The lawsuit argues this language is too vague and dangerous for pregnant people and providers.. The organization has brought similar suits in Tennessee, Idaho, and Oklahoma. But the Texas one marks the first time that directly impacted pregnant people have sued their state over a post-Roe law.. These challenges are drawing attention to the thin exceptions that have accompanied abortion-restrictive laws. Often referred to as “life of the mother” exceptions, they act as vague asterisks that tend to leave patients and providers confused, resulting in a diminished standard of care for pregnant people.. “While there is technically a medical exception to the bans,” Molly Duane, the senior attorney for the plaintiffs, said in the arguments this week, “no one knows what it means and the state won’t tell us.”. This past August, a district court judge ruled that the state’s near-total abortion ban could not be enforced in pregnancies with certain levels of complications, including those with lethal fetal diagnoses. Texas’ supreme court justices, all of whom are Republican, are deciding whether or not they will side with the state or uphold the lower court’s ruling. The latter would signal that challenges to unclear medical exceptions may work in the future.. Decisions about life-saving healthcare have become increasingly complex and uncertain since Roe was overturned—and even before then in Texas. The state’s six-week abortion ban dates back to 2021 and set a nationwide example for how to criminalize providers. The OB-GYNs in the Texas case have said that the state’s exception has led to “widespread confusion among the medical community” that left them and their colleagues unable to do their jobs well. And if providers misinterpret exceptions and perform abortions that do not fall under the rules, the stakes are high; medical professionals risk prison time, fines, and the potential loss of their licenses.. It’s unclear how much clarity the justices’ decision, which Duane expects this summer, will provide for pregnant people and medical teams across the state. Until then, more plaintiffs are coming forward to ask where their pregnancy story fits into the law.. Many of the plaintiffs bringing these cases across the country, including in Texas, wanted these pregnancies. Some long-dreamt of being parents only to face devastation when hearing of fetal anomalies or health complications during a regular check-up. The appointments in question usually take place after 18 weeks of pregnancy and abortion bans’ week-based cut-offs are often before that time. These circumstances leave pregnant people and their families with little time to mourn before figuring out how to move forward.. The women suing the state of Texas had to make these tough decisions, and quickly. Some left the state for abortion care, while others gave birth to babies who only lived for seconds. Others were told to wait until they were in graver danger before the hospital staff would provide care.. “Politicians in Texas are prohibiting healthcare that they don’t understand,” Lauren Miller, one of the original plaintiffs said at a news conference this spring. “They could do something. But they’re not. And it’s killing us.”
