The Texas Supreme Court rules against women seeking abortions for medical emergencies

Dec. 11 (Reuters) – The Texas Supreme Court on Monday overturned a lower court’s decision to allow a pregnant woman to undergo an emergency medical intervention for the state’s abortion restrictions. state, and accepted a request by the Republican Attorney General Ken. Paxton.

The unanimous decision from the Texas Supreme Court came hours after attorneys for Kate Cox said in a court filing that she had left the state to have an abortion, however wanted to continue the matter. Cox said her baby had a serious illness and her health was at risk if she continued the pregnancy to term, including her ability to have more children in the future.

The supreme court, whose nine justices are all Republicans, said his thought not signed that a “good faith” claim by Damla Karsan, a doctor who attempted to perform the abortion and was sued along with Cox, that the procedure was medically appropriate was not enough to qualify for a state exemption.

Instead, the court said, Karsan needed to prove in his “reasonable medical judgment” that Cox had a “life-threatening condition” and that an abortion was necessary to prevent her death or harm. a great physical activity.

“A woman who meets the medical specialty need not seek a court order to obtain an abortion,” the court wrote. “The law gives doctors – not judges – both the discretion and responsibility to exercise their appropriate medical judgment, given the facts and unique circumstances of each patient,” the letter said. that of the court.

This case is a big test of the state of the doctor, a case that is already before the court in another case brought by 22 women who were affected by pregnancy problems, although none of those women sought an immediate abortion. Monday’s decision appeared to reject a key argument by the plaintiffs in the case – that the doctor’s good faith belief must be sufficient to meet the exemption.

“This decision should anger all Texans to their core,” said Molly Duane of the Center for Reproductive Rights, an attorney for Cox, in a statement. “If Kate can’t have an abortion in Texas, who can? Kate’s case is proof that exemptions don’t work, and it’s dangerous to get pregnant in any state with an abortion ban.” baby.”

Paxton’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Cox’s fetus was diagnosed on November 27 with trisomy 18, a genetic disorder that often results in miscarriage, stillbirth or stillbirth. immediately after birth.

Paxton urged the Texas Supreme Court to step in quickly after U.S. District Court Judge Maya Guerra Gamble’s ruling in a hearing in Austin today Last week, an injunction was granted to prevent Cox from having an abortion.

In its filing with the high court, Paxton’s office said Cox had “failed to demonstrate” that he met the criteria for a medical conviction and warned that the Texas court was not expected to be a “revolving door.” consent forms to obtain abortion.”

Cox, 31, of the Dallas-Fort Worth area, filed a lawsuit last Tuesday seeking a temporary injunction to prevent Texas from enforcing its abortion laws in its case.

Cox’s attorneys say his lawsuit is the first since the U.S. Supreme Court last year reversed its landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade, which guaranteed civil rights throughout the country.

Cox, who was about 20 weeks pregnant when she first sued, said in her lawsuit that she would need to have a third Caesarian section if the pregnancy continued. That could jeopardize her ability to have more children, which she said she and her husband wanted.

Cox said in her lawsuit that although her doctors believed an abortion was right for her, they were unwilling to perform one without a court order because of the lack of clarity on how the exemption will be defined and the penalties can include life in prison and loss of their license for violating the state’s abortion laws.

Paxton warned in a letter sent after Gamble issued the order that it does not protect doctors, hospitals or anyone else from prosecution or possible civil liability for violating the law. the abortion of Texas. The letter was sent to three hospitals where Karsan accepted vacancies.

Last Friday, while the case was pending, a pregnant woman in Kentucky filed a new class action lawsuit against her abortion ban. of that state.

Our Terms: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Brendan Pierson reports on product liability and on all areas of health law. He can be reached at brendan.pierson@thomsonreuters.com.