AUSTIN, Texas (CN) — A Texas judge blocked parts of the state's strict abortion laws on Friday, giving physicians the ability to use their “good faith judgment” when treating patients with severe pregnancy complications.
In a 6-page opinion granting the Center for Reproductive Rights' motion for a temporary injunction, Travis County District Court Judge Jessica Mangrum wrote that the language of the state’s abortion bans as written creates uncertainty when determining whether a pregnant patient is eligible for an abortion under a medical exemption.
The lack of consistency has led to many physicians refusing to provide abortions to patients until their lives are at imminent risk, causing mothers to carry non-viable pregnancies to term or forcing them to seek abortions outside of the state. This was the experience of 13 plaintiffs named in the lawsuit, all of them women who were denied abortions in Texas despite being told that their pregnancies posed a risk to their health and safety.
Mangrum, in her ruling, instituted a new standard for physicians to follow when deciding whether a patient should be offered an abortion. Patients that have non-viable pregnancies may also be provided abortions without fear of prosecution under the injunction.
“Emergent medical conditions that a physician has determined, in their good faith judgment and in consultation with the patient, pose a risk to a patient’s life and/or health (including their fertility) permit physicians to provide abortion care to pregnant persons in Texas under the medical exception to Texas’s abortion bans and…the Texas Constitution,” Mangrum wrote.
Texas physicians have largely steered clear of providing abortion-related care out of fear of being jailed, losing their medical licenses or facing thousands of dollars in fines. A physician found to have provided abortion in Texas faces up to 99 years in prison, the revocation of their medical license and paying a fine over $100,000. Additionally, any person who provided or helped provide an abortion may be sued under a civil statute by private citizens for a minimum of $10,000.
Nearly two weeks before Friday’s ruling, the plaintiffs in the case gave emotional testimony as to their own experiences of being pregnant in Texas.
Lead plaintiff Amanda Zurawski shared her story with the court on July 19. During her second trimester, the membrane that surrounded her baby ruptured, making her pregnancy no longer viable. Zurawski’s doctors refused to provide her with an abortion.
She was told by her doctors that they could not intervene while her daughter, Willow, still had a heartbeat or until she presented symptoms of a life-threatening condition. Days later, Zurawski developed sepsis, an extreme reaction caused by an infection. Though she was later provided an abortion, damage to her reproductive organs was already done. Zurawski believes that she would not have endured a life-threatening infection and damage to her future ability to have children if she was provided an abortion when she learned her pregnancy was no longer viable.
Reacting to Mangrum’s ruling, Zurawski said, in a press release provided by the Center for Reproductive Rights, that she cried out of joy.
“This is why we put ourselves through the pain and the trauma over and over again to share our experiences and the harms caused by these awful laws,” said Zurawski. “Now people don’t have to be pregnant and scared in Texas anymore. We’re back to relying on doctors and not politicians to help us make the best medical decisions for our bodies and our lives.”
Alongside the 13 patient plaintiffs, two OB-GYNs who practice in the state were also involved in the lawsuit. One such physician, Damla Karsan, said that the ruling is exactly what was needed for medical providers to feel safe providing the care they believe their patients need without fear of prosecution.
Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, said in a press release that the ruling is a key step in ensuring that other pregnant Texas do not go through what Zurawski or the other 12 patient plaintiffs went through.
“It would be unconscionable for the State of Texas to appeal this ruling,” said Northup. “The court has been clear: doctors must be able to provide patients the standard of care in pregnancy complications.”
The state is expected to appeal the ruling. Attorneys for the state sought to have the case dismissed by Mangrum. They argued that the plaintiffs lacked standing because they were not actively being harmed by the laws. Furthermore, the state asserted that what happened to Amanda Zurawski and the other 12 patient plaintiffs was the fault of their physicians, not the law.
In denying the state's motion to toss out the case, Mangrum wrote that the state will not be harmed by permitting physicians to provide abortions to patients with emergent medical conditions.
The attorney general’s office was unable to be reached for comment on the ruling.
A trial to consider the merits of the case is set for March 25, 2024.
Fourteen states, including Texas, have outlawed all abortions. The case brought by the Center for Reproductive Rights in Texas is the first of its kind since the Supreme Court upended the Constitutional right to abortion last year with its decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Whole Women’s Health Organization. The center has indicated that they are exploring bringing similar lawsuits in other states.
Follow @KirkReportsNews
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
