The court ruled that the lower court made a mistake in ruling that the woman, Kate Cox, who is more than 20 weeks pregnant, was entitled to a medical exception.

Ms. Cox asked the lower court for approval after she learned that her fetus had a fatal condition, and after several trips to the emergency room.

In short, the life or health exemptions to abortion bans in Republican-controlled states are meaningless.

  • Veedem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    149
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Women are screwed in states like Texas. This woman isn’t someone who was careless and doesn’t want to live with consequences. This is as clear cut and in line with the supposed exceptions as can be. She’s very fortunate that she can afford to go elsewhere. There are many woman who don’t have that same option. Absolutely horrible.

    • spaceghoti@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      61
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Hopefully, she can afford to stay out of Texas. Her life and safety are at risk, as well as legal jeopardy from these shenanigans.

      • Bizarroland@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        38
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Yeah, if I were her I would never go back to Texas. Who knows if some jackass is going to try to make their career off of imprisoning her for getting an out of state abortion?

      • Jay@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Sadly that’s still a win for texas. One less vote against them.

        • TwoGems@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          It’s not like we could get anyone to vote anyway. They had the opportunity to show up and didn’t.

          Just 45.7% of 17.7 million voters showed up.

  • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    147
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    I predict the same shenanigans for exceptions for rape. “You were raped? Ok let’s wait for the conviction. It took too long and now you can’t get an abortion? Teehee.”

    • asteriskeverything@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      10 months ago

      Fuck, it can even be a struggle for a woman to even be believed that she was raped. Especially in right leaning counties/cities/states. And also fight for an exception? I do wonder have any women been given a medical exception?

      • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        10 months ago

        I have yet to hear about any medical exemptions, this was the first which was then discarded.

        This rejection will have a chilling affect on the willingness of others to try for an exemption as well.

        • AA5B@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          Even worse, it sounds like it wasn’t entirely settled, just delayed until after it makes no difference

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        It’s ver y easy to get an exception - I understand you were raised. Let’s schedule a court date 12 weeks from now to see if you’re under the six week limit

        • asteriskeverything@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          *raped Sorry it took me an embarrassing amount of time to figure that autocorrect out so just wanna share for others.

          But damn that hits home. Pro-life Americans don’t wanna even listen or consider that the system of “exceptions” don’t function at all even at the most basic of empathetic levels. Like a 5 year old would talk about terminating an unsustainable or unwanted pregnancy with more grace and empathy than a republican congress person. And emphasis on person- it can be appalling what the women are willing to say and support.

    • Chainweasel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      10 months ago

      I imagine it’ll be more like:
      “You were raped? Do you have a photo of yourself in the outfit you were wearing when you were raped? We need see if you were asking for it or not before we make that decision”

      • unalivejoy@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        10 months ago

        “Did you orgasm? It’s a sin if you were raped and enjoyed it.” Wait, that’s for church.

        • Chainweasel@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          10 months ago

          If there was a line between the church and the state we wouldn’t be in this situation in the first place.

          • AA5B@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            It’s too bad our country’s founders didn’t consider whether there should be a separation of church and state

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      10 months ago

      The idea that a woman has to prove to legal satisfaction that she was raped in order to get an abortion is so fucking sickening. There shouldn’t be the same standard for a raped woman to get an abortion than there is to convict her rapist.

      • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        While I think its sickening, they need some way to at least prove it happened to legal satisfaction. Not the same standard I agree.

        If all you had to do was claim rape and invent an imaginary situation the police would never figure out (e.g masked rapist in a no camera area of town when no one was around) then every woman could just claim rape to get an abortion.

        Filing a false police report probably has consequences but worse than having an unwanted child?

        Although I’m not saying a conviction is needed here, but some sort of medical agreement that rape was likely, however they determine that now with rape kits.

        This whole thing is maddening though. They should be able to get an abortion if they want one end of story.

        Edit: for anyone who wants to or has downvoted me here, please do tell me how we can ban abortions and have an exception for rape, but not have a way of verifying a rape without allowing 100% of woman to claim rape for 100% of abortions. This shitty situation is reality, and you can’t just disagree and say they should be allowed an abortion because they want one. That’s not a valid answer to our current situation as shitty as it is.

        • ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          If all you had to do was claim rape and invent an imaginary situation the police would never figure out (e.g masked rapist in a no camera area of town when no one was around) then every woman could just claim rape to get an abortion.

          What’s wrong with that?

          They should be able to get an abortion if they want one

          Which is exactly why there’s nothing wrong with women lying about being raped. You shouldn’t have to have been raped to get an abortion in the first place and I’d be lying my ass off about it if I needed an abortion.

          “Yes officer I didn’t see any defining features he wore a mask and didn’t speak he also put a bag over my head and put a blindfold on me”

          • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Sadly that just won’t fly. It sucks, but you’re being delusional if you think a state with an abortion ban would accept such a glaring loophole in their laws.

            Edit: 100% unrelated but I seem to be getting delayed notifications that I even have a reply to a message? Am I the only one experiencing that?

            • ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              Oh I know it won’t I’m just saying that’s exactly what I would say before nopeing the fuck outta state permanently.

              As for the notification thing idk what app your using but it’s normal on jerboa. You can just check your notifications manually and it’ll be there before the actual notification

              • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                10 months ago

                I like to think I would have noped out of the state permanently well before I got pregnant.

                I’m using sync, the inbox will show no new messages even when I refresh it, and then 5 min later show one that’s 20 minutes old. I haven’t dug into it further though like comparing to the web.

  • IHeartBadCode@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    51
    ·
    10 months ago

    For those wondering, the State’s Supreme Court is hardlining the Legislative language here.

    While I don’t know medicine enough to give real percentages, the lower Judge ruled the abortion could continue because there was like a 70% or something chance of dying and the letter of the Texas law requires something along the lines of a 95% chance of death.

    Again I don’t think one can attribute hard numbers, but the Supreme Court is saying that the laws indicate that only when death is pretty much assured can an abortion happen, which is a completely insane stance. And in this case death was only mostly going to happen, not absolutely going to happen.

    Roughly speaking, the Texas Supreme Court basically said that the person needs to be closer to death than the defendant in this case. How much closer? The Court isn’t super clear, but clearly much more closer to death than this person was.

    Because clearly taking pain and suffering into account is just beside the point at this point for Texas.

    • TallonMetroid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      51
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Because clearly taking pain and suffering into account is just beside the point at this point for Texas.

      No, the suffering is the point. The entire “pro-life” “stance” is nothing more than an excuse to indulge in oppression.

      • Supervisor194@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        35
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Precisely correct. This married woman - who wants more children and is a clear case for an exception - couldn’t be allowed an exception, because the whores need to be made to suffer for their poor choices.

        We can’t be muddying the waters with all this “nuance.” The whores are going to pay in the state of Texas, and that will be that.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          Apparently abortion is so much murder that even if they’re going to die within minutes of being born, it’s still murder.

  • Zuberi 👀@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    10 months ago

    Texas and Florida are both genuinely fucked in terms of any civil liberties. Guns have more rights here than most of the state.

  • mkwt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    Breaking news is that she has decided to secure her own health in another state.

    • nakal@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      10 months ago

      The system is broken when you have to discuss your health with judges instead of a doctor.

        • silence7@slrpnk.netOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          10 months ago

          Yes, but courts will do that kind d of thing on a temporary basis to prevent something irreversible from happening before they rule. Temporary blocks like that don’t guarantee a particular final decision.

  • MisterFrog@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    10 months ago

    As an outsider, it is absolutely wild that we’re seeing refugees within the same allegedly developed country. I’m more convinced everyday the United states is a just a bunch of countries in a trench coat.

    • silence7@slrpnk.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      10 months ago

      It’s not really a new phenomenon. The book Albion’s Seed goes into detail about how the country was put together by different groups of people with very different ideas about what it should be. Those fundamental disagreements define a lot of modern political conflict within the US.

    • body_by_make@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      10 months ago

      It says it on the tin. United States. However, as with any group of entities all striving for power and being driven apart by outside forces, not so united these days.

    • silence7@slrpnk.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Could also go the other way, if large numbers of women leave the state seeking better odds of surviving pregnancy.

      • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        10 months ago

        It’s worth pointing out that Texas already has really high infant and pregnancy mortality rates too.

        Either Republicans get fucked in the polls, or Texas gets fucked. All the companies there will have to relocate if they want to attract and retain their professional employees. Or, they could have policies to aid people seeking an abortion, and dare the state to sue them for it.

        • TechyDad@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          10 months ago

          Was that before the flight of any doctor whose practice could even touch on abortion? Because doctors are fleeing Texas and I don’t blame them. If my state ruled that I could go to prison for 10 years and become a felon just for doing my job, I’d get out and go to a more welcoming state.

          Sadly, this means that a lot of poorer people won’t be able to get decent healthcare. Hopefully, before it gets too bad (relatively speaking) there’s a political backlash that kicks the Republicans out of office.

  • Rice_Daddy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    10 months ago

    The whole article is quite a dystopian read. Paxton’s intervention into medical decisions is self-righteous, and a statement from an anti-abortion group that was so cruel I felt a little sick.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    10 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    “Kate desperately wanted to be able to get care where she lives and recover at home surrounded by family,” Nancy Northup, the chief executive for the Center for Reproductive Rights, which was representing Ms. Cox in her case, said in a statement.

    The case was believed to be the first to seek a court-ordered exception since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last year, clearing the way for Republican-controlled states like Texas to enact near-total bans on abortions.

    It marked a new chapter in the legal history of abortion in the United States, with pregnant women now going to court seeking permission for their doctors to do what they determine to be medically necessary without fear of severe criminal or civil penalties.

    That case, Zurawski v. Texas, involves women who said they were forced to continue pregnancies, despite dangers to their health, because the vagueness of the state’s exemptions made doctors extremely cautious about when a medical condition was serious enough to allow for an abortion.

    The judge issued a temporary restraining order barring Mr. Paxton and others from enforcing the state bans against Dr. Karsan, Ms. Cox’s husband, and any medical staff members who assisted an abortion in her case.

    Lawyers for Mr. Paxton’s office argued that the standard for determining what constitutes a serious threat was clear: a doctor’s “reasonable medical judgment” that a pregnancy posed such a risk; they said Ms. Cox did not meet that threshold.


    The original article contains 1,070 words, the summary contains 242 words. Saved 77%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!