The Texas Supreme Court has temporarily halted a lower court decision that permitted a Texas woman to undergo an emergency abortion. This move comes as several states tighten their abortion laws raising concerns about access to reproductive healthcare.
Attorney general representing the state urged the court to overturn a judge’s ruling that granted a woman’s request for an abortion due to a severe anomaly in her pregnancy. The Supreme Court has decided to review the case, suspending the lower court’s decision until a thorough evaluation is conducted.
The woman involved, Kate Cox, had initiated legal action against the state challenging its restrictive abortion measures. She sought a temporary restraining order from the court to enable her to proceed with the abortion.
In response to the Supreme Court’s decision, Molly Duane, a senior staff attorney at the Center for Reproductive Rights, expressed concerns about potential delays in justice.
Duane laid emphasis about the urgency of medical care in such cases stating, “Kate is already 20 weeks pregnant. This is why people should not need to beg for healthcare in a court of law.” “We fear that justice delayed will be justice denied,” she added.
Lower court grants request
The lower court, presided over by Judge Maya Guerra Gamble, a Democrat, granted Cox’s request, highlighting the potential harm caused by the restrictive laws.
Judge Gamble remarked, “The idea that Miss Cox wants desperately to be a parent, and this law might actually cause her to lose that ability is shocking, and would be a genuine miscarriage of justice.”
Baby diagnosed with trisomy
Cox, who is 20 weeks pregnant with a baby diagnosed with trisomy 18, a condition with little chance of survival, got emotional as the judge delivered her decision, media reports said.
A temporary restraining order blocking the implementation of Texas’ abortion bans, including the controversial SB8, remains in effect until December 20.
Overnight, the Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton promptly filed an appeal, stressing the urgency of the matter.
The Centers for Reproductive Rights responded, condemning the state’s petition as disregarding Cox’s life, fertility, and the rule of law.
(With inputs from agencies)
