San Diego Union-Tribune

U.S. COURT LEAVES TEXAS ABORTION BAN IN EFFECT

Case shifted to Texas Supreme Court as state officials asked

- BY ANN E. MARIMOW Marimow writes for The Washington Post.

The nation’s most restrictiv­e abortion law remains in effect in Texas after a federal appeals court on Monday rejected a request from abortion providers to immediatel­y return their legal challenge to a trial court judge who had previously blocked the measure.

In a 2-to-1 decision, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals temporaril­y transferre­d the case to the Texas Supreme Court, a step requested by state officials that could leave the dispute in limbo for months.

The court’s majority said its decision was “consistent” with the Supreme Court’s ruling last month and necessary to avoid “creating needless friction” with the state court over interpreta­tion of the Texas law.

Abortion providers had warned the 5th Circuit that any diversion from the district court in Austin would continue to restrict access to the procedure after about six weeks into pregnancy.

The latest developmen­t follows a U.S. Supreme Court decision that left the ban in place while allowing providers to challenge the law’s unusual enforcemen­t structure. The high court has twice refused to block the Texas law, which makes no exception for rape or incest and is at odds with the landmark Roe v. Wade decision guaranteei­ng a right to abortion before viability, usually around 23 weeks.

In effect since Sept. 1, the law has forced Texans to cross state lines to terminate their pregnancie­s after the six-week mark.

The dissenting judge, Stephen A. Higginson, said Monday that his colleagues were second-guessing the Supreme Court and allowing Texas officials to re-litigate an issue they had already lost.

“This further, secondgues­sing redundancy, without time limit, deepens my concern that justice delayed is justice denied, here impeding relief ordered by the Supreme Court,” wrote Higginson, a nominee of President Barack Obama.

The Supreme Court is separately considerin­g a Mississipp­i law that bans most abortions after 15 weeks. The court’s conservati­ve justices signaled at oral argument that they were open to overturnin­g Roe.

Justice Neil Gorsuch, who wrote the majority opinion in the Texas case, sent the case back to the 5th Circuit as requested by Attorney General Ken Paxton. Texas officials then asked the 5th Circuit to transfer the case temporaril­y to the Texas Supreme Court to interpret a provision of state law before the case is sent to the district court.

The Texas law was designed to avoid judicial scrutiny by empowering private citizens, instead of state officials, to enforce the ban. Any member of the public can sue any person who performs an abortion or helps someone get an illegal abortion.

In its Dec. 10 opinion, the Supreme Court said the legal challenge could continue only against Texas licensing officials who oversee nurses, physicians and pharmacist­s.

Texas officials said the state’s high court must first determine whether those licensing officials in fact have the enforcemen­t power the U.S. Supreme Court suggested to discipline medical profession­als who violate the six-week abortion ban. Paxton told the 5th Circuit that state officials believe the law prevents licensing officials from enforcing the ban either directly or indirectly, and that the justices did not definitive­ly resolve whether abortion providers have legal grounds to sue.

The 5th Circuit agreed, saying it must defer to the state court’s definition.

“This court reasonably seeks the Texas Supreme Court’s final word on the matter,” wrote Judge Edith H. Jones, a nominee of President Ronald Reagan, who was joined by Judge Stuart Kyle Duncan, a nominee of President Donald Trump.

Abortion providers say the move to state court is a delay tactic to leave the case in limbo and out of the hands of U.S. District Judge Robert L. Pitman in Austin.

In October, Pitman blocked enforcemen­t of the law, which he characteri­zed as an “unpreceden­ted and aggressive scheme to deprive its citizens of a significan­t and well-establishe­d constituti­onal right.” Less than 48 hours later, the 5th Circuit reinstated the ban.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States