Clarity on abortion exceptions, more enforcement on abortion pills pass Texas Senate
AUSTIN (Nexstar) — The Texas Senate passed multiple pieces of legislation this week that would give reproductive care providers more clarity for when a doctor can legally perform an abortion to save a mother’s life, and also legislation that would allow Texas residents to sue abortion pill manufacturers and anyone who delivers to product to the state.
State Sen. Bryan Hughes, R – Mineola, authored Senate Bill 31. It passed the Texas Senate with unanimous support. Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick said after the passage the bill, “clarifies current law to provide guidance to physicians when they treat a pregnant woman who is at risk of death or substantial impairment of a major bodily function by clearly defining “life-threating.”
The bill defines the medical emergencies where doctors can intervene to save the mother’s life. It also provides exceptions for pregnant women going through cancer treatment.
Although gaining support from Senate Democrats, State Sen. Molly Cook, D – Houston, said the bill helps a lot, but more needs to be done for reproductive health in the state. “There’s still no exceptions for instances of rape, or incest, or fetal anomalies, and it of course does nothing for people who just want to be in charge and have the choice,” Cook said.
Moments after passing SB 31, senators debated another bill from Hughes, SB 2880. It expands enforcement on abortion-inducing medications by allowing Texans to sue anyone who mails or delivers abortion pills to Texas, including the companies that manufacture the product, for $100,000.
“Women are being harmed. Women are being hurt by these pills,” Hughes said when laying out his bill on the Senate floor. He referenced a recent study conducted by the Ethics and Public Policy Center, a faith-based policy institute. The study analyzed, “health insurance claims database that includes 865,727 prescribed mifepristone abortions from 2017 to 2023.”
Of those abortions, the study found 10.93% of the women experienced a “life-threatening adverse event.” But, other studies have shown success from the pills. One study found in a one- year period, of the 2,268 women who used the drug, 98.4% were satisfied with the experience.
Texas has already tried to enforce civil penalties on a New York-based doctor. Attorney General Ken Paxton sued the doctor, saying she mailed abortion-inducing medications to a Texas woman that resulted in the death of an unborn child and serious complications for the mother. A Texas judge issued a $100,000 penalty, but the doctor may not have to pay that fine.
Mary Ziegler, a law professor at the University of California Davis, said the main question about this case is whether or not Texas courts can force judgements in New York courts. Ziegler said the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the U.S. Constitution states, “When one state’s courts reach a final decision the other state’s courts have to respect it, but that’s not true in every single circumstance.”
New York, and other states, passed “shield laws” to protect their residents from either civil or criminal consequences based on offering abortion and other reproductive healthcare. Texas will have to go to federal court to get an answer, Ziegler said.
“There’s definitely a feeling I think when it comes to abortion pills in Texas of people in the pro-life or anti-abortion movement trying a whole bunch of strategies to see what works because to date, nothing has. To date, even though Texas obviously has some of the strongest abortion bans in the nation, there hasn’t been much success in shutting down access to abortion pills,” Ziegler explained.
She said the Supreme Court is more “anxious” forcing one state to honor another state’s judgements when it involves something that either is a criminal penalty or civil law equivalent. As an example, she said if the state of California sued a Texas resident for owning a handgun because it’s against their laws, the Supreme Court would most likely not force Texas courts to comply with that judgement.
But, she did explain the Supreme Court has said it is different if a private citizen is suing another private citizen, and could be a more successful path at enforcing this anti-abortion pill bill. However, New York does have “clawback” laws that would allow a private citizen to countersue for interfering with their rights, creating an even more tricky legal issue.
“Whatever happens it’s going to be a mess,” Ziegler said.
