On Friday, the Texas Supreme Court denied a challenge to one of the nation's strictest abortion prohibitions. The court, which consists of nine elected Republicans as judges, ruled unanimously in favor of upholding Texas' abortion ban. The ban's opponents claim the court's judgment lacks sufficient clarification regarding authorized exceptions.
As stated in the AP, the court held that doctors would be misinterpreting the law if they refused to conduct an abortion when the mother's life was in jeopardy and that the exclusions are sufficiently broad as worded. Republican Justice Jane Bland signed the court's order, which stated, "Texas law permits a life-saving abortion." In order to prevent Texas from implementing the restriction against physicians who, in their "good faith judgment," stopped a pregnancy they believed was risky owing to difficulties, state District Judge Jessica Mangrum granted a temporary injunction last summer.
However, an appeal to the state's Supreme Court by the Texas attorney general's office immediately stopped that. Amanda Zurawski of Austin, who was informed that her unborn child would not live, was one of the more than twenty Texas women who joined the complaint. The primary plaintiff in the case, Zurawski, claimed she was compelled to wait for an abortion until receiving a diagnosis of a potentially fatal case of sepsis. After spending three days in the intensive care unit, Zurawski developed an infection that permanently clogged her fallopian tube, which prevented her from becoming pregnant. Following the decision, Zurawski released a statement saying, "I am outraged on behalf of my fellow plaintiffs who the court deemed not sick enough." "Everyone has a right to physical autonomy. It is a daily reminder to the people of Texas that they are without alternatives. It is disgusting and incorrect.
Rather than trying to overturn Texas' abortion prohibition, the March 2023 case sought to expand the definition of permissible exceptions. The complaint contended that certain pregnant women experiencing health complications were being turned away by doctors due to fear of repercussions stemming from the law's too-loosely worded exemptions, which permit an abortion to save a mother's life or prevent the impairment of a major bodily function. The court decided that a woman does not need a doctor's evaluation to determine whether or not an abortion is "imminent" if her death or a major handicap is not imminent. Doctors who perform abortions run the possibility of a $100,000 punishment, life in jail, and the loss of their state medical licenses, according to Texas law. That, according to critics, has left some women with doctors who are not even ready to talk about ending a pregnancy.
As stated in the AP, the court held that doctors would be misinterpreting the law if they refused to conduct an abortion when the mother's life was in jeopardy and that the exclusions are sufficiently broad as worded. Republican Justice Jane Bland signed the court's order, which stated, "Texas law permits a life-saving abortion." In order to prevent Texas from implementing the restriction against physicians who, in their "good faith judgment," stopped a pregnancy they believed was risky owing to difficulties, state District Judge Jessica Mangrum granted a temporary injunction last summer.
However, an appeal to the state's Supreme Court by the Texas attorney general's office immediately stopped that. Amanda Zurawski of Austin, who was informed that her unborn child would not live, was one of the more than twenty Texas women who joined the complaint. The primary plaintiff in the case, Zurawski, claimed she was compelled to wait for an abortion until receiving a diagnosis of a potentially fatal case of sepsis. After spending three days in the intensive care unit, Zurawski developed an infection that permanently clogged her fallopian tube, which prevented her from becoming pregnant. Following the decision, Zurawski released a statement saying, "I am outraged on behalf of my fellow plaintiffs who the court deemed not sick enough." "Everyone has a right to physical autonomy. It is a daily reminder to the people of Texas that they are without alternatives. It is disgusting and incorrect.
Rather than trying to overturn Texas' abortion prohibition, the March 2023 case sought to expand the definition of permissible exceptions. The complaint contended that certain pregnant women experiencing health complications were being turned away by doctors due to fear of repercussions stemming from the law's too-loosely worded exemptions, which permit an abortion to save a mother's life or prevent the impairment of a major bodily function. The court decided that a woman does not need a doctor's evaluation to determine whether or not an abortion is "imminent" if her death or a major handicap is not imminent. Doctors who perform abortions run the possibility of a $100,000 punishment, life in jail, and the loss of their state medical licenses, according to Texas law. That, according to critics, has left some women with doctors who are not even ready to talk about ending a pregnancy.
