I understand this has been discussed in the Pit, but I’m interested in it as a breaking news story, hence this thread.
My first question on hearing about the Temporary Restraining Order was what legal arguments Ms Cox’s lawyers were advancing. I wondered if they would be making a new constitutional argument. Looks like that’s not the case, at least, the judge didn’t refer to constitutional issues. She relied solely on the Texas statute, concluded that there is a threat to Ms Cox’s life, and the doctor has a good faith belief that an abortion is medically necessary.
Judge had set it for hearing on the merits on December 20, but of course that has been stayed by order of the appellate court.
I’ve not found out if a hearing date has been set by the appellate court, nor whether that will just be in the TRO, or if the appellate court will deal with the merits?
Link to the TRO;
PS - if you want to vent, the Pit’s a fine place for that. I hope this can be a discussion thread as this issue develops.
I don’t know much about the legal arguments. But I suspect demographics don’t favour social conservative policies some think infringe on personal freedoms, even in the short term.
The latest is that she’s leaving Texas to get an abortion. I guess that will open the folks who help her to getting sued by any random person who wants to.
I wonder if they can still get sued if the appeals court hears the case and decides she had the right to get one? Or, will they say it’s now a moot point?
My guess would be she and her family will have to make a new life in another state rather than risk prosecution and prison in Texas, because you just know Paxton will gleefully go after her and anyone else who made her escape possible.
This is an interesting point – Paxton can file all kinds of bogus charges, which are expensive to defend, even if there’s no there there.
And, of course anyone who helped is subject to being sued.
I’m holding back on any further abortion commentary, because it’s not relevant to the thread, but I’m really disturbed, though unsurprised, by all of this.
Something hit me while reading this thread - has anyone been sued in Texas using their “any citizen has the right to sue someone if they get an abortion or aide someone in getting an abortion” rule? Is Center for the Reproductive Rights expecting to get sued? I, personally, am hoping they do, and the Texas rule is ruled unconstitutional.
I can’t find a cite, because this current case is dominating everything, but I recall some woman’s friend getting sued by the pregnant woman’s ex. I don’t know if there have been other cases, because what doctor is going to risk the lawsuits?
ETA: It’s possible that that particular law is no longer on the books, since it’s no longer needed with the overturning of Roe.
Yeah, but why not kick them while they’re down, ya know what I mean? Wasn’t part of that rule that if you left the state you could be sued, the driver could be sued, the doctor could be sued, the full-service gas station attendant could be sued, the waitress at the diner,…
Trisomy happens when the fetus inherits an extra chromosome. This is always a severe condition (unless it happens on a sex chromosome), and in most cases it’s not compatible with life.
However, Trisomy 21 carries much less severe symptoms and has a much better prognosis than Trisomy 13 (Patau Syndrome) and Trisomy 18 (Edwards Syndrome) There is also partial trisomy, also known as mosaic, where the fault that causes the extra chromosome happens during development and doesn’t affect every gene in the body.
Although the number assigned to any given chromosome reflects its overall length, that doesn’t always correspond to the number of active genes on that chromosome. Trisomy’s involving 21, 18 and 13 are survivable because those chromosomes have fewer genes that code for proteins than other chromosomes.
As I mentioned in the Pit thread, I have a female family member with a genetic condition that only affects reproduction….simply put, all the genes are there, but some of them aren’t in the right place. It’s not a particularly rare condition ( about 1 in 1500 ) but it’s one that frequently goes undiagnosed.
In addition to problems conceiving, and an increased risk of miscarriage and minor birth defects, any time she gets pregnant, she has a 1% chance on having a child with Trisomy 13.
The good part is that this can be diagnosed very early in pregnancy. The bad part is that thanks to people like Paxton and the Texas Supreme Court, she may not be able to do anything about it.
What happens if you lose and just flat out don’t pay the judgement? It’s a civil matter so my understanding is that the prevailing party has to go through the same process as any other civil judgment to collect. So just don’t pay and make them “work for it”…what are they going to do?
File bankruptcy before the judgement is entered. Like Donald and corporations, churches and other organizations do.