A lawsuit filed on March 7, 2023, in state court in Austin, Texas, has accused doctors and hospitals in Texas of turning away pregnant women who need abortions due to serious health risks. The medical providers reportedly refuse to provide abortions out of fear of prosecution. The plaintiffs are two obstetrician-gynecologists in Texas, and five women denied abortions despite dangerous pregnancy complications. The Center for Reproductive Rights represents the plaintiffs, with co-counsel from Morrison & Foerster and the Kaplan Law Firm.
The suit seeks a declaratory judgment clarifying the scope of Texas’ exception to its abortion bans. The plaintiffs argue that physicians using their good-faith judgment may provide abortions to women with an emergent medical condition that poses a risk of death or a risk to their health (including their fertility). At a minimum, the court should determine that physicians may provide abortions when a medical condition makes the continued pregnancy unsafe, when a medical condition is made worse by pregnancy and can’t be effectively treated, or when the fetus is unlikely to survive.
According to the press release, Texas has three abortion bans. A state trigger ban occurred after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the abortion-rights opinions Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey. The ban restricts all abortions except for limited exceptions. The second law authorizes private suits for damages against those who aid an abortion after about six weeks of pregnancy. The third abortion ban was enacted before Roe was initially decided in 1973, and several courts have ruled that the law was impliedly repealed.
Physicians in Texas who violate the state’s abortion laws face fines of at least $100,000, up to 99 years in prison, and revocation of their medical licenses. The state makes an exception when a physical condition arising from pregnancy places the woman “at risk of death or poses a serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function,” according to Republican Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s guidance cited by the New York Times.
Get ahead of the competition by submitting your resume to LawCrossing – don’t wait any longer!
The lead plaintiff in the lawsuit is Amanda Zurawski of Austin, Texas. She was reportedly denied an abortion after she experienced a condition known as PPROM, also known as preterm premature rupture of membranes. Three days later, Zurawski experienced sepsis and underwent an emergency induction abortion. The infection caused one of Zurawski’s fallopian tubes to close permanently. She is now seeking to become pregnant through in vitro fertilization.
Ashley Brandt of Dallas is another plaintiff in the lawsuit. She had to travel to Colorado to obtain a fetal reduction abortion after learning that the skull of one of her twins was not developing normally. Afterward, her Texas physician was so fearful that he described her condition as “vanishing twin syndrome,” according to the suit.
The lawsuit argues that the Supreme Court may have stripped pregnant people of their federal constitutional right to abortion, but that does not mean that plaintiffs are without constitutional rights. The suit cites provisions of the Texas Constitution that guarantee equal rights and preserve privileges and immunities.
The lawsuit has garnered attention from several media outlets, including the Associated Press, Reuters, and the New York Times. Amanda Zurawski said in a press release, “Texas officials claim the bans they passed protect ‘life,’ but there’s nothing pro-life about them. I nearly died as a direct result of the anti-abortion restrictions in Texas.”
Overall, the lawsuit seeks to protect women’s reproductive rights and access to healthcare in Texas. The plaintiffs hope the court will clarify the scope of Texas’ exception to its abortion bans and ensure that physicians can provide abortions to women with dangerous pregnancy complications.