The legal fight between Kate Cox and Texas courts over her medical emergency underscores the need for states to quickly clarify their sweeping anti-abortion laws Ariana Baio and Kelly Rissman report
The four emergency room visits, emotional turmoil, possibility of infertility and her foetus’ fatal diagnosis were not enough for Texas to allow Kate Cox to get an abortion, illuminating a major issue with the state’s strict abortion ban: ambiguous language that undermines exceptions to the law.
On Monday, the state’s ultra-conservative supreme court reversed a lower court’s emergency order initially granting Ms Cox an abortion. The court claimed she did not meet the state’s requirement to have an abortion but noted that it was up to a physician to determine when an abortion was warranted, not a court.
The ruling directly contradicted what the Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR) and Ms Cox’s doctor argued about the urgency of her case. It also provided little clarity on the state’s interpretation of the law.
Ultimately, Ms Cox couldn’t wait for the court to decide the fate of her body. Her condition was so dire that she ended up fleeing Texas to seek care.
The kind of person who said this sort of thing wouldn’t happen when people said this would happen.
They knew, it was just the minimizing and dismissive language their trainers gave them to say.
If there does exist some magical person who really believed the GOP has a line when it comes to harm, then they can be held complicit anyway under the charge of being “a massive tool who lacks the empathy or care to explore one iota of the world around them”