The Texas Supreme Court recently intervened in a case involving a 31-year-old Dallas area mother, Kate Cox, who sought an abortion for her unborn baby diagnosed with Trisomy 18 (Edwards syndrome). Cox, who has a history of medical complications including two prior cesarean surgeries, faced severe health risks if her pregnancy continued. Her lawsuit, filed by the Center for Reproductive Rights, aimed to challenge Texas’s strict abortion laws.
The case initially saw a temporary restraining order issued by Democrat Travis County District Judge Maya Fuerra Gamble, allowing the abortion to proceed. However, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton requested the Texas Supreme Court to block this order. The Supreme Court’s intervention put the temporary restraining order on hold, citing the need for further legal review.
Paxton argued that the lower court’s order wouldn’t protect healthcare providers from civil and criminal liabilities under Texas law, which bans abortions except when the pregnant woman’s life is at risk or there’s a serious threat to her physical health. He emphasized that a “reasonable medical judgment and life-threatening physical condition” is the legal standard for permitting an abortion.
In Cox’s case, her healthcare provider, Dr. Damla Karsan, believed the pregnancy posed a significant risk to Cox’s life and future fertility. However, the specifics of Cox’s medical condition and how it precisely aligns with the legal standards for the medical exception under Texas law were not detailed in Paxton’s challenge.
Paxton also sent a letter to the hospitals where Dr. Karsan had admitting privileges, questioning her assessment and the process used to determine Cox’s eligibility for the medical exception.
This case, Cox v. Texas, is one of the first major legal challenges to state abortion laws since the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973. It parallels another case, Zurawski v. Texas, involving 20 women who claim Texas’s abortion laws denied them proper healthcare and endangered their lives.
The Texas Supreme Court’s decision to halt the lower court’s ruling reflects the complex legal and ethical issues surrounding abortion in the U.S., especially in states with stringent abortion laws. The ongoing debate highlights the tension between state legislation, medical ethics, and individual rights in the context of reproductive healthcare.
IN SEVERE CASES LIKE THIS , SHE SHOULD BE ABLE TO GET A ABORTION.
with her record of unfortunate pregnancies, she should get her tubes tied!!!
It’s a shame our maker allowed all humans the ability to reproduce !
The mere fact that GOVERNMENT is involved with such shows how STUPID some humans are !!!!
100% TRUTH!!!!
†
Agree
IS THIS NOT A “SPECIAL” MEDICAL CASE (??) WHERE A SOLID FOUNDATION HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.
THIS DOES NOT SOUND LIKE THE ORDINARY RUN OF THE MILL (“SLUT”), WHERE PRESONAL PLEASURE IS THE GOAL AND BASICALLY THE RESULTS IS OUT RIGHT MURDER>
I have not seen anywhere that the woman’s life is in danger. Only her ability to have more babies. But the law says that her life has to be endangered. Given the people who are chalenging Texas’ right to regulate abortion in the state, I would not take the assertions too seriously. Where is a second opinion?
Why is it we are so quick to dismiss human life, in the name of saving another life. This woman had many choices like so many other woman do, but we are convinced that this is the only choice. I find it interesting that the Democrat parties first choice is to destroy the baby. When I look at a happy child around the 14 month old time frame and see the joy of how they are experience life and everything that it has to offer, I have to ask myself why is it that there are those out that the just want to terminate it. When I listen to a young dad that is about 35 and has this small child they will tell you that it’s a ton of work, but it worth every minute. That is what is lost no thanks to a group of folks out there that tell you other wise. A good friend of mine was adopted when he was 4 months old and did not realize he was adopted until he graduated from college with his law degree. He has never found out who is real parents where but never stopped loving and caring for his adopted parents. Life is wonderful when you sit back and really look at it.
When did we give up our right to private health decisions? Since when is it illegal to make healthcare decisions without government interventions? HIPPA supposedly keeps our medical information private- until lawyers stick their noses in our medical records.
Daily we loose more and more rights “for our own safety.”
The problem is too many lawyers with lined pockets grabbing ng power and stepping on the constitution.
These days we are not free, we are working hard to replicate the controls of Nazi Germany
When the life of the mother is at risk, this should be something that should be worked out with family and seeking guidance from the Lord above who is the giver of life. There is a children’s hymn that says, search, ponder and pray. These are the things that I must do. The Spirit will guide me deep inside and tell me these things are true. Personally I feel that the life of the Mother must be preserved and it must be done when the Lord our God gives the word. He will hear and answer our prayers. I know, because I have experienced His Answers and His Power many times in my life.
It’s amazing just how stupid and corrupt the left became for the love of power. Everything they tryed to blame trump for, their the ones doing it. And still they cry when their new rigging of elections fail. And they try to say no one’s above the law. If so, then why are they trying to breaking every law we have ???
I love what old wolf. Had to say- the whole truth in a nutshell!
I believe she can go to another state that allows abortions and have it terminated there
Or maybe she could just start keeping her bloomers on?
†
So what the problem she can come to Calif. and have us Calif taxpayer pay for it