Texas Supreme Court Hears Abortion Rights Group

Updated Nov. 29, 2023, 3:00 p.m. EST

• On Tuesday, the Texas Supreme Court heard the Center for Reproductive Rights' case against state abortion laws, claiming they harm women who face pregnancy complications. The plaintiffs are arguing that the medical expectations in the state's abortion bans are too limiting and do not protect patients facing pregnancy-related emergencies. 
• The state's Supreme Court is considering whether to issue a temporary injunction, which would give doctors greater discretion over when to perform abortions. A lower court judge already ruled the injunction should be in place. 
• Observers said several justices seemed sympathetic to the plaintiffs' stories, many of whom have faced pregnancy complications and difficult medical circumstances. Liz Sepper, a professor at Texas Law, said a decision should come in the upcoming weeks or months. 
• Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is defending the state's current abortion laws, and maintains that the case should be dismissed. 

What's the story?

• The Center for Reproductive Rights filed legal actions in Tennessee, Idaho, and Oklahoma last week on behalf of women who were denied abortion care during medical emergencies.
• The actions include lawsuits against the states of Idaho and Tennessee and a federal complaint lodged with the Department of Health and Human Services against a hospital in Oklahoma.
• The lawsuits do not seek to overturn the abortion bans in these states but rather to draw attention to the trauma and harm plaintiffs suffer when doctors fail to provide abortions out of fear of liability.
• The lawsuits against Idaho and Tennessee include physician plaintiffs who share the challenges of providing care amid the specter of fines, prison time, and the revocation of their medical licenses. 
• The legal action in Oklahoma focuses on a woman who was denied an abortion, despite heavy bleeding and agonizing pain, and was told to wait in the hospital's parking lot.
• Rachel Rebouché, a professor of law, said:

"Even outside the court of public opinion, the state may be failing to protect people's right to life under the state constitution or another law."

Lawsuit in Texas

• Earlier this year, the Center filed a lawsuit in Texas arguing that exceptions to protect the life and health of the mother are vague, ultimately jeopardizing the health of pregnant women. Nearly all of the 17 states where abortion is banned have exceptions for medical emergencies, but the exceptions are written in non-medical language and fail to reflect the full spectrum of health risks associated with pregnancy.
• Mae Winchester, a maternal-fetal medicine specialist, said:

"People completely underestimate how dangerous a pregnancy can be, even to a healthy person."

• In August, a Texas judge ruled that in cases of dangerous or complicated pregnancies, doctors should be permitted to use "good faith judgment" about whether to provide abortion care. The state immediately appealed the ruling, which is currently on hold. Oral arguments are scheduled for November.
• Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights, said:

"After we filed our case in Texas, our phones started ringing off the hook."

What anti-abortion groups are saying

• Anti-abortion activists argue that the risks to pregnant individuals are exaggerated and that state-level legal actions amount to "scare tactics."
• They claim that broad exceptions will create loopholes, allowing abortion clinics to find health exceptions to justify performing the procedure.
• Steven Aden, from Americans United for Life, accused reproductive rights advocates of creating "a fabrication to scare the public." He continued:

"All of the pro-life doctors I've talked to say that there is no state law that prohibits treating a pregnant women who is in emergent circumstances."

Do you support the lawsuits?

-Emma Kansiz

(Photo Credit: iStock/jimplumb)