Women sue the state of Texas for abortion ban and claim their life, health and fertility are at risk

() — Several women who say Texas’ abortion bans pose significant health risks sued the state this week, opening a new front in legal battles that have erupted since the US Supreme Court struck down national protections. to the right to abortion in its decision against Roe v. Wade last year.

Five women argue in the demand that uncertainty about when emergency medical exemptions to Texas abortion laws apply exacerbated medical emergencies that put their lives, health, and fertility in jeopardy.

“To the extent that Texas’ abortion bans prevent abortions from being performed on pregnant persons to treat medical conditions that endanger the life of the pregnant person or pose a significant risk to their health,” the lawsuit states, ” the bans violate the rights of pregnant persons” under the provisions of the state Constitution that protect fundamental rights and the right to equality.

The lawsuit is not intended to block Texas’ abortion ban. Rather, the women — joined by two medical providers in the lawsuit — are asking the court to clarify that abortions can be performed when a doctor makes a “good faith judgment” that “the pregnant person has an emergent medical condition.” that poses a risk of death or a risk to your health (including your fertility)”.

The women’s lawsuit details harrowing stories of being denied abortion care when faced with emergency complications from their pregnancies, which were all wanted. They filed the lawsuit Monday afternoon in state court in Austin, Texas.

The State of Texas, its Attorney General Ken Paxton, the Texas Medical Board and its CEO, Stephen Brint Carlton, are listed as defendants in the case.

A Paxton spokesperson said in a statement that he “is committed to doing everything in his power to protect mothers, families and unborn children, and will continue to defend and enforce laws duly enacted by the Texas Legislature. “.

The spokeswoman, Paige Willey, also pointed to guidance Paxton issued after last year’s Supreme Court ruling that said the state’s trigger law “protects women who face life-threatening physical conditions as a result of of complications in pregnancy.

A spokesman for the state medical board did not respond to ‘s request for comment. Gov. Greg Abbott’s office also did not immediately respond to ‘s inquiry.

Texas, flash point in legal fight over abortion

Texas, which has arguably the most aggressive abortion restrictions in the country, has been the scene of several legal battles over abortion since before the Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade in June 2022.

Prior to that ruling, an appeal was also filed in the Supreme Court against Texas’ 2021 civil abortion ban, which allows private civil lawsuits to be brought against anyone accused of facilitating an abortion once the patient’s heartbeat is detected. fetus, that is, around six weeks of pregnancy. The judges allowed the law to remain in effect, even though Roe was still in effect at the time.

Last year, Texas also filed a preemptive lawsuit to block the Biden administration’s guidelines, which told health professionals that they were required by federal law to provide abortion services in cases of medical emergencies. A federal judge sided with Texas and stopped the enforcement of the guidelines, which threatened civil penalties and conditioned federal funding on compliance, in the state.

The abortion laws at issue in the new lawsuit are a six-week civil enforcement ban, the so-called “trigger ban,” which took effect after last year’s Supreme Court ruling, and a ban on abortion before Roe. The statutes contain language that allows exemptions for medical emergencies.

“However, inconsistencies in the language of these provisions, the use of non-medical terminology, and careless legislative wording have led to understandable confusion throughout the medical profession about the scope of the exception,” the lawsuit says.

It remains to be seen how successful this Monday’s lawsuit will be. The Texas State Supreme Court, which is often the final arbiter on whether state laws comply with the Texas Constitution, has ruled in favor of Texas abortion restrictions in previous disputes that have gone all the way to the state high court.

Plaintiffs’ accounts

The women who filed the lawsuit, all Texas residents, claim they suffered irreparable harm — including emotional trauma and risks to their physical health — because of the obstacles they had to overcome to get the care they needed.

One of the plaintiffs, Amanda Zurawski, claims that she “was forced to wait until she was septic to receive abortion care, resulting in the permanent closure of one of her fallopian tubes.”

As Zurawski and her husband previously told , she became pregnant after a year and a half of fertility treatments. But at 18 weeks pregnant, well before her viability point, her water broke and her doctor told her the baby would not survive, by her account.

However, her doctors told her they would not terminate the pregnancy until “it was considered that I was sick enough to be life-threatening,” she told last year, adding that they told her it could take hours, days or even weeks.

Zurawski and her husband decided they couldn’t risk taking several hours to travel to another state where an abortion could be done. According to the lawsuit, when Zurawski developed a fever that reached 39 degrees Celsius and began to show signs of sepsis, her doctors considered that they could legally induce labor without violating Texas abortion laws. However, she suffered a secondary infection and septic shock, and her family flew to Austin, fearing that she might die. Although she eventually recovered, the infections damaged her reproductive organs.

Another of the plaintiffs, Lauren Miller, was pregnant with twins, but tests conducted told her that one of the fetuses had multiple abnormalities that made it highly unlikely that she would survive to birth, according to the lawsuit. Her specialists suggested that she travel out of state, but evaded giving her and her husband direct answers to her questions, the lawsuit says.

“It was apparent that her doctors, nurses, and advisors were afraid to speak directly and openly about abortion for fear of liability under Texas’ abortion ban,” the lawsuit states.

Ultimately, Miller traveled to Colorado to undergo so-called selective reduction, a procedure in which the probably non-viable fetus is aborted to preserve the health of the other fetus and the mother.

A third plaintiff, Lauren Hall, traveled to Seattle to have an abortion after being told in an 18-week ultrasound that her fetus had a condition that was preventing it from surviving. According to the lawsuit, she was told the disease carried risks of bleeding and premature labor, among others. But she claims that her specialist in Texas did not give her information about her options or even transfer her medical records to an abortion provider.

The fourth plaintiff, Anna Zargarian, claims in the lawsuit that at 19 1/2 weeks pregnant her water broke. She was diagnosed with premature rupture of the membranes (PRMP) and told the fetus would not survive until birth, according to the lawsuit.

But even when doctors told her that the recommended treatment was an abortion, they told Zargarian they couldn’t perform it because the fetal heartbeat was still detectable, according to the lawsuit. Ultimately, Ella Zargarian underwent the procedure in Colorado, but she now fears becoming pregnant again in Texas because she has been told she is at high risk of developing RPMP-related conditions, according to the lawsuit.

The fifth plaintiff, Ashley Brandt, also claims that she had complications in a twin pregnancy, during which one fetus developed conditions that endangered the other. Although she was ultimately able to have a selective abortion in Colorado, according to her lawsuit, she was faced with other complications that at one point sent her to the ER, where she felt “clear restlessness and confusion.”

“It appeared that the medical staff felt they should not know about or discuss Ashley’s miscarriage with her,” the lawsuit said, adding that the remainder of her pregnancy “was plagued with fear and stress.” She finally gave birth to a healthy baby boy at 38 weeks pregnant.

In a statement, Vice President Kamala Harris praised the lawsuit, saying it shows that fears about “the harm” patients “would experience as a result of Texas’ extreme laws” had come true.

“The lawsuit includes devastating, first-hand accounts of women’s lives nearly lost after they were denied the health care they needed due to the extreme efforts of Republican officials to control women’s bodies,” Harris said.