The Texas Supreme Court ruled against Kate Cox, the pregnant mother who sought permission to obtain an emergency abortion, on Monday.

The Texas Supreme Court ruled against Kate Cox, the pregnant mother who sought permission to obtain an emergency abortion, on Monday.

“These laws reflect the policy choice that the Legislature has made, and the courts must respect that choice,” the court’s seven-page ruling read. The court found that Cox’s doctor, Dr. Damla Karsan, had “asked a court to pre-authorize the abortion yet she could not, or at least did not, attest to the court that Ms. Cox’s condition poses the risks the exception requires.”

Cox, who is 20 weeks pregnant and a mother of two, had filed a lawsuit against Texas over its restrictive abortion bans. Her fetus was found to have a fatal condition known as Trisomy 18. The baby has no chance of survival, but under state law, there are only two options available to Cox: a vaginal delivery, or a C-section. Either option would risk her life or her ability to have children in the future.

Earlier on Monday, Cox’s lawyers said she was forced to flee the state to get medical care.

  • @QuaternionsRock
    1•1 year ago

    This is so obviously untrue it’s insane. How did this pass anyone’s sniff test?

    A person charged in any state with treason, felony, or other crime, who shall flee from justice, and be found in another state, shall on demand of the executive authority of the state from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the state having jurisdiction of the crime.

    • Article IV of the U.S. Constitution
    • 520
      2•1 year ago

      True, however states cannot criminally charge people for actions performed in other states.

      So Texas cannot make it a crime to go get an abortion in California, for example. They cannot make it a crime to travel to California for that purpose either.

      That’s why they’re trying to make these things civil offenses, which aren’t covered under the constitution clause you quoted.