The Texas Supreme Court, in a late Friday ruling, temporarily halted a pregnant woman, Kate Cox, from undergoing an emergency abortion.
This decision was made by freezing a lower court’s ruling that had granted Cox permission to proceed with the procedure. The intervention came in response to a petition from Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton urging the high court to step in.
Paxton sought the Texas Supreme Court’s intervention in the case of Kate Cox, who had received approval from a lower court on Thursday for an emergency abortion.
A Texas judge had issued a 14-day temporary restraining order against the state’s abortion ban to allow Cox, who filed a lawsuit seeking a court-ordered abortion, to legally terminate her pregnancy.
This development marked a significant turn in the ongoing debate surrounding Texas’s stringent abortion ban, particularly concerning medical exceptions after six weeks.
In the petition filed with the state Supreme Court, Texas requested an emergency stay of the district court judge’s decision. Paxton had already threatened legal action against anyone aiding in facilitating the abortion.
In a letter to three Houston hospitals where Cox’s physician holds privileges, Paxton argued that Cox had not demonstrated a “life-threatening” medical condition related to her pregnancy.
He warned that the hospitals would not be shielded from civil and criminal liability, including first-degree felony prosecutions and civil penalties of at least $100,000 for each violation.
Kate Cox, who is 20 weeks pregnant, had sought an emergency hearing for an abortion after learning that her unborn baby had trisomy 18, a fatal genetic condition, with a life expectancy of only a few days outside the womb, according to the lawsuit.
According to her claim, Cox, 31, has visited three different emergency rooms in the past month for severe cramps and unclear fluid leakage.
According to the lawsuit, “continuing the pregnancy puts her at high risk for severe complications threatening her life and future fertility, including uterine rupture and hysterectomy.” She has undergone two prior caesarean procedures, or C-sections.
Petition Demonstrates a Lack of Concern for Cox’s Well-being
On Friday, lawyers representing Cox, with support from the Center for Reproductive Rights, an advocacy group for abortion rights, addressed Attorney General Paxton’s petition.
They urged the state’s high court to reject Paxton’s request, denouncing the attorney general’s endeavor as “remarkably indifferent to Ms. Cox’s life, reproductive health, and the principles of legal governance.”
“The State claims that it alone has the power to value Ms. Cox’s current nonviable pregnancy more highly than Ms. Cox’s own life and life of the future children she and her husband hope to have, regardless of Ms. Cox’s wishes for her family and the good faith advice of her medical team,” their response states.
The reply continues by stating that the plaintiffs agree that the state Supreme Court should take immediate action, specifically to remind the Attorney General that he operates within the legal framework as an officer, and is obligated to adhere to court orders just like the citizens he claims to serve.
The legal document also urges the state Supreme Court to dismiss Paxton’s threat of prosecuting doctors and anyone aiding in facilitating the abortion.
Molly Duane, Cox’s attorney, did not disclose on Thursday the timing or location of Cox’s planned abortion but mentioned the intention to ensure she receives care in the most expeditious manner possible.
Source: cnn.com
