A Texas judge ruled on Friday that the state’s abortion ban is too restrictive for women with serious pregnancy complications, and exceptions must be allowed without doctors fearing criminal charges.
This ruling is significant as it is the first to undermine Texas’ abortion law since its implementation in 2022. It is seen as a potential model to weaken restrictions in other Republican-led states that have hurriedly imposed similar laws.
Amanda Zurawski, the lead plaintiff, expressed her joy in a statement: “For the first time in a long time, I cried for joy when I heard the news. This is exactly why we did this. 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.”
State District Judge Jessica Mangrum issued a temporary injunction that prevents the enforcement of the ban against doctors who, in their “good faith judgment,” terminate a pregnancy that poses a risk of infection or is otherwise unsafe for the woman. The injunction also applies to women with conditions exacerbated by pregnancy that cannot be effectively treated during their term and cases where the fetus has a condition that makes survival after birth unlikely.
The injunction will remain in place until the completion of the case, with the trial scheduled to begin on March 25 next year.
This challenge is believed to be the first in the United States brought by women who have been denied abortions since the Supreme Court overturned the landmark Roe v. Wade decision last year, which had affirmed the constitutional right to an abortion for almost 50 years.
The state is expected to seek a swift appeal and argues that exceptions already exist in Texas’ ban, dismissing doctors’ fears of prosecution as unfounded.
There was no immediate clarity on the immediate impact of Mangrum’s decision in a state where all abortion clinics have closed in the past year.
In a six-page ruling, the judge found that certain provisions of the abortion law infringed upon the rights provided to pregnant individuals under the Texas Constitution.
The court determined that the plaintiffs in the case had experienced “emergent medical conditions” during pregnancy that endangered their health or lives and required abortion care. However, they were denied or faced delays in accessing such care due to the widespread uncertainty about the impact on physicians.
Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, which assisted in bringing the lawsuit, stated, “Today’s ruling should prevent other Texans from suffering the unthinkable trauma our plaintiffs endured. It would be unconscionable for the State of Texas to appeal this ruling.”
During the emotional testimony given over two days in an Austin courtroom, women shared heartbreaking accounts of learning that their babies would not survive birth and being unable to travel long distances to states where abortion is still legal.
The challenge, filed in March, does not seek to repeal Texas’ abortion ban but aims to bring more clarity regarding the circumstances under which exceptions are allowed in one of the most restrictive abortion laws in the country.
Under the Texas law, doctors who perform abortions face imprisonment and fines of up to $100,000. Critics argue that this has left some women with healthcare providers who are unwilling to even discuss terminating a pregnancy.
According to a poll released in late June by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, a majority of U.S. adults, including those residing in states with the strictest abortion limits, believe that abortion should be legal at least in the early stages of pregnancy.