Texas Supreme Court Rules Against Woman Who Sought Court-Approved Abortion
Texas Supreme Court Rules Against Woman Who Sought Court-Approved Abortion
The court ruled that the lower court made a mistake in ruling that the woman, Kate Cox, who is more than 20 weeks pregnant, was entitled to a medical exception.
...
Ms. Cox asked the lower court for approval after she learned that her fetus had a fatal condition, and after several trips to the emergency room.
In short, the life or health exemptions to abortion bans in Republican-controlled states are meaningless.
Women are screwed in states like Texas. This woman isn’t someone who was careless and doesn’t want to live with consequences. This is as clear cut and in line with the supposed exceptions as can be. She’s very fortunate that she can afford to go elsewhere. There are many woman who don’t have that same option. Absolutely horrible.
Hopefully, she can afford to stay out of Texas. Her life and safety are at risk, as well as legal jeopardy from these shenanigans.
Yeah, if I were her I would never go back to Texas. Who knows if some jackass is going to try to make their career off of imprisoning her for getting an out of state abortion?
She’s welcome in Colorado. The right to an abortion is a state law and we have some upcoming ballot initiatives to make abortion access a right in the state constitution.
I predict the same shenanigans for exceptions for rape. "You were raped? Ok let's wait for the conviction. It took too long and now you can't get an abortion? Teehee."
Fuck, it can even be a struggle for a woman to even be believed that she was raped. Especially in right leaning counties/cities/states. And also fight for an exception? I do wonder have any women been given a medical exception?
It’s ver y easy to get an exception - I understand you were raised. Let’s schedule a court date 12 weeks from now to see if you’re under the six week limit
The idea that a woman has to prove to legal satisfaction that she was raped in order to get an abortion is so fucking sickening. There shouldn't be the same standard for a raped woman to get an abortion than there is to convict her rapist.
While I think its sickening, they need some way to at least prove it happened to legal satisfaction. Not the same standard I agree.
If all you had to do was claim rape and invent an imaginary situation the police would never figure out (e.g masked rapist in a no camera area of town when no one was around) then every woman could just claim rape to get an abortion.
Filing a false police report probably has consequences but worse than having an unwanted child?
Although I'm not saying a conviction is needed here, but some sort of medical agreement that rape was likely, however they determine that now with rape kits.
This whole thing is maddening though. They should be able to get an abortion if they want one end of story.
Edit: for anyone who wants to or has downvoted me here, please do tell me how we can ban abortions and have an exception for rape, but not have a way of verifying a rape without allowing 100% of woman to claim rape for 100% of abortions. This shitty situation is reality, and you can't just disagree and say they should be allowed an abortion because they want one. That's not a valid answer to our current situation as shitty as it is.
You underestimate how backwards Texas is. There is no rape exception, period.
I'm curious how the "but there's exceptions!" Crowd will try to spin this
They won’t, everything is working. Why would they spin “success?”
Exactly. The same way they're not spinning calls for a national abortion ban after years of "leave it up to the states."
For those wondering, the State’s Supreme Court is hardlining the Legislative language here.
While I don’t know medicine enough to give real percentages, the lower Judge ruled the abortion could continue because there was like a 70% or something chance of dying and the letter of the Texas law requires something along the lines of a 95% chance of death.
Again I don’t think one can attribute hard numbers, but the Supreme Court is saying that the laws indicate that only when death is pretty much assured can an abortion happen, which is a completely insane stance. And in this case death was only mostly going to happen, not absolutely going to happen.
Roughly speaking, the Texas Supreme Court basically said that the person needs to be closer to death than the defendant in this case. How much closer? The Court isn’t super clear, but clearly much more closer to death than this person was.
Because clearly taking pain and suffering into account is just beside the point at this point for Texas.
Because clearly taking pain and suffering into account is just beside the point at this point for Texas.
No, the suffering is the point. The entire "pro-life" "stance" is nothing more than an excuse to indulge in oppression.
Precisely correct. This married woman - who wants more children and is a clear case for an exception - couldn't be allowed an exception, because the whores need to be made to suffer for their poor choices.
We can't be muddying the waters with all this "nuance." The whores are going to pay in the state of Texas, and that will be that.
Thanks for the simple to understand summary.
This isn't their choice in the first place, it's the family's choice.
Texas and Florida are both genuinely fucked in terms of any civil liberties. Guns have more rights here than most of the state.
This might turn out really funny even though it's horrible right now for a lot of people in Texas. All of the women are going to leave if they can, especially ones with money and an education. Then you're left with the poor people, a bunch of incels and/or white christians fighting over the women that are left. Have fun dumb asses.
Serious note: If you have a woman or family in your life that you care about or just want to help people, get them out of Texas.
This case confirms that Republicans will not allow exceptions for the mother's health. Paxton has now put into writing, as the state's legal argument, that the legal system can't go by what doctors consider reasonable. Because then someone could find a doctor who would probably grant it.
Hang this millstone around every Republican's neck. Ask every Republican if they agree with Paxton's death panels; if they agree that it's okay for the government to get involved and throw red tape when there's a >5% chance of death without a procedure. Ask them if they would like to rebuke Paxton. And ask what they'll do to make sure that can't happen in any state, including Texas -- or, if people should vote for a Democrat if they want this fixed.
Hold their feet to hot fucking coals until there's sear marks.
That's what they want, so they can solidify Texas as a red state for the next 20 years for voting purposes. Nothing else matters bcz this is all just a game to them.
Then you're left with the poor people, a bunch of incels and/or white christians fighting over the women that are left.
Did you mean to describe all of the south?
Any state that is doing this bs, there are some midwest states in there too.
The Texas Supreme Court is adding a blue tinge to Texas, whether they realize it or not.
Could also go the other way, if large numbers of women leave the state seeking better odds of surviving pregnancy.
It's worth pointing out that Texas already has really high infant and pregnancy mortality rates too.
Either Republicans get fucked in the polls, or Texas gets fucked. All the companies there will have to relocate if they want to attract and retain their professional employees. Or, they could have policies to aid people seeking an abortion, and dare the state to sue them for it.
As an outsider, it is absolutely wild that we're seeing refugees within the same allegedly developed country. I'm more convinced everyday the United states is a just a bunch of countries in a trench coat.
It's not really a new phenomenon. The book Albion's Seed goes into detail about how the country was put together by different groups of people with very different ideas about what it should be. Those fundamental disagreements define a lot of modern political conflict within the US.
It says it on the tin. United States. However, as with any group of entities all striving for power and being driven apart by outside forces, not so united these days.
Indeed not
That image for this post sure looks like a death panel to me
Misread it as "Toxic" instead of "Texas." Still accurate.
Seems like cons want Texas to be part of the Republic of Gilead.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
“Kate desperately wanted to be able to get care where she lives and recover at home surrounded by family,” Nancy Northup, the chief executive for the Center for Reproductive Rights, which was representing Ms. Cox in her case, said in a statement.
The case was believed to be the first to seek a court-ordered exception since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last year, clearing the way for Republican-controlled states like Texas to enact near-total bans on abortions.
It marked a new chapter in the legal history of abortion in the United States, with pregnant women now going to court seeking permission for their doctors to do what they determine to be medically necessary without fear of severe criminal or civil penalties.
That case, Zurawski v. Texas, involves women who said they were forced to continue pregnancies, despite dangers to their health, because the vagueness of the state’s exemptions made doctors extremely cautious about when a medical condition was serious enough to allow for an abortion.
The judge issued a temporary restraining order barring Mr. Paxton and others from enforcing the state bans against Dr. Karsan, Ms. Cox’s husband, and any medical staff members who assisted an abortion in her case.
Lawyers for Mr. Paxton’s office argued that the standard for determining what constitutes a serious threat was clear: a doctor’s “reasonable medical judgment” that a pregnancy posed such a risk; they said Ms. Cox did not meet that threshold.
The original article contains 1,070 words, the summary contains 242 words. Saved 77%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
For those wondering, the State’s Supreme Court is hardlining the Legislative language here.
While I don’t know medicine enough to give real percentages, the lower Judge ruled the abortion could continue because there was like a 70% or something chance of dying and the letter of the Texas law requires something along the lines of a 95% chance of death.
Again I don’t think one can attribute hard numbers, but the Supreme Court is saying that the laws indicate that only when death is pretty much assured can an abortion happen, which is a completely insane stance. And in this case death was only mostly going to happen, not absolutely going to happen.
Roughly speaking, the Texas Supreme Court basically said that the person needs to be closer to death than the defendant in this case. How much closer? The Court isn’t super clear, but clearly much more closer to death than this person was.
Because clearly taking pain and suffering into account is just beside the point at this point for Texas.