Texas Abortion Law: Who's Been Sued And Why?

In 2023, Marcus Silva filed a lawsuit against three women, claiming they helped his ex-wife, Brittni Silva, obtain abortion pills. The lawsuit, which was the first of its kind since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, sought damages of $1 million from each woman. However, in October 2024, Silva dropped the case, with his lawyer citing a settlement as the reason. The defendants, Amy Carpenter, Jackie Noyola, and Aracely Garcia, stated that Silva had not received any monetary compensation and that they were ready to fight the baseless suit in court. This case has brought attention to the Texas abortion law, which allows private citizens to file wrongful death lawsuits for aiding and abetting an abortion.

Texas man drops wrongful death lawsuit against three women

In March 2023, a Texas man named Marcus Silva sued two of his ex-wife’s friends, Amy Carpenter and Jackie Noyola, as well as local abortion-rights activist Aracely Garcia. Silva accused them of murder for allegedly helping his former partner obtain abortion medication and sought millions of dollars in damages.

In a countersuit, Carpenter and Noyola called Silva a "serial emotional abuser" who knew about his former partner’s plans to terminate her pregnancy and did not intervene, with the goal of using the information against her. They also alleged that he illegally searched his ex-wife's phone without her consent.

Silva was represented by Jonathan Mitchell, a former Texas solicitor general who helped draft a strict Texas abortion law known as Senate Bill 8, which allows residents to sue anyone they suspect of "aiding and abetting" an abortion. Mitchell has also represented other men seeking to file legal action against former partners who terminated their pregnancies.

In October 2024, Silva dropped the lawsuit after a judge refused his request to delay the trial. As part of the settlement, the two women agreed to drop their countersuit against Silva.

"While we are grateful that this fraudulent case is finally over, we are angry for ourselves and others who have been terrorized for the simple act of supporting a friend who is facing abuse," Noyola said in a statement. "No one should ever have to fear punishment, criminalization, or a lengthy court battle for helping someone they care about."

Texas Supreme Court hears case brought by women denied abortions

On November 28, 2023, the Texas Supreme Court heard arguments in a case brought by 20 women who allege they were denied emergency care due to the state's abortion laws, marking the first time patients denied abortions have sued a state since Roe v. Wade was overturned. The women argue that the medical exceptions in the state's abortion bans are too narrow to protect patients facing pregnancy complications.

One of the plaintiffs, Taylor Edwards, shared her story of having to leave Texas and travel to Colorado to receive care. After a long IVF journey, Edwards became pregnant, but during her anatomy scan, she received a fatal diagnosis of an encephalocele, meaning her baby would never survive if she carried to term. Despite the severity of her situation, Edwards was denied care by her doctor in Texas, who cited the state's abortion laws as the reason for their inability to help.

The lead attorney for the plaintiffs, Molly Duane, emphasized the trauma and difficulties that women like Edwards have faced due to the restrictive abortion laws in Texas. She highlighted the bravery of the plaintiffs in sharing their stories publicly and the need to ensure that abortion is recognized as standard reproductive medical care.

Duane also addressed the extreme penalties that physicians who violate Texas' abortion laws could face, including life in prison, loss of their medical license, and hefty civil fines. This has created a climate of fear among doctors, who are unsure of when they can legally provide abortion care.

The Texas Assistant Attorney General, Beth Klusmann, countered that the problem lies with the doctors' interpretation of the law rather than the law itself. She argued that the medical exceptions are clear and that doctors are allowed to use their reasonable medical judgment.

The outcome of this case will have significant implications for abortion access and emergency care for pregnant women in Texas.

Texas abortion bounty law

Texas' abortion bounty law, also known as Senate Bill 8 (SB8), allows private citizens to sue anyone who performs or aids an abortion after six weeks of pregnancy. The law includes a bounty-hunting scheme, encouraging individuals to sue anyone in Texas who violates the law by offering a reward of at least $10,000. This law has been criticised for effectively turning citizens into informants, as people are incentivised to monitor and report each other's behaviour to the authorities.

The law bans abortion as early as six weeks into a pregnancy, which is before many people even know they are pregnant. As a result, approximately 85 to 90% of people who obtain abortions in Texas will be at least six weeks into their pregnancy, meaning this law will decimate abortion access in the state. The average one-way driving distance for pregnant Texans seeking an abortion will now increase 20-fold, from 12 miles to 248 miles. This will disproportionately impact people of colour, people living in rural areas, and those struggling financially, as they will need to travel out of state and incur additional expenses related to hotel stays, transportation, childcare, and lost wages.

The first case under the Texas abortion bounty law was filed by Marcus Silva against three women who he alleged helped his ex-wife terminate a pregnancy with abortion pills. Silva accused them of murder and sought millions of dollars in damages. However, he dropped the lawsuit after a judge refused his request to delay the trial. While this particular case did not result in anyone being sued under the law, it illustrates the chilling effect of such legislation, as people may be fearful of even contemplating abortion due to the threat of legal consequences.

The Texas abortion bounty law is part of a broader trend of conservative legislation that encourages Americans to monitor and report each other's behaviour, particularly in the areas of abortion, LGBTQ rights, and school curricula. This has been referred to as the "Snitch State", where invasive forms of coercion are used to impose conservative values and restrict individual freedoms. While some of these measures have faced legal challenges and have not been strictly enforced, the threat of privacy invasion and potential destruction of one's life is enough to shape people's speech and behaviour.

Texas abortion trigger ban

Texas' abortion "trigger ban" is a state bill that was set to automatically go into effect 30 days after the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. The bill, House Bill 1280, was passed last year and would automatically ban all abortions, with doctors facing life in prison or a $100,000 fine for performing them. The only exceptions are for women whose lives are at risk or who face a "substantial impairment of a major bodily function" if an abortion is not performed.

The bill's author, Rep. Giovanni Capriglione, a Southlake Republican, said: "The goal of this bill is to end the practice of abortion in Texas." The bill provides for rules to be in place without the legislature having to meet again.

Legal experts have questioned how the law would be carried out, particularly if Roe v. Wade was only "partly" overturned. UT Austin law professor Elizabeth Sepper said: "It doesn't provide a measure of clarity... I think there's just really wide-open questions as to whether and when the law would go into effect in the absence of an explicit and express overruling of Roe v. Wade."

Texas' abortion trigger ban is part of a wave of similar laws passed by Republican-controlled state legislatures across the country. These laws are designed to quickly and automatically go into effect after the overturning of Roe v. Wade, which had given Americans the constitutional right to an abortion.

The trigger ban is just one of several restrictive abortion laws passed in Texas in recent years. In 2021, the state passed Senate Bill 8, which prohibits abortions after cardiac activity is detected in a fetus. This law was not challenged on constitutional grounds but instead on Texas' civil enforcement mechanism, which permits almost anyone to sue a person who performs an abortion. Another Texas law restricts access to abortion pills.

The impact of these laws has been devastating for people seeking abortions in Texas. Amy Hagstrom Miller, the founder and CEO of Whole Woman's Health, which has a clinic in Fort Worth, said her organization has had to turn away 70-80% of people seeking abortions. She said: "It's confusing. It's worrisome. There are so many uncertainties. We are trying to navigate those and run medical practices that can be available and open and welcoming for all of the people who need us, but the state is making it next to impossible for us to do so."

The Texas abortion trigger ban has also had a chilling effect on doctors, who are unsure of when they can and cannot perform abortions. Damla Karsan, a Houston ob-gyn, said: "There's a lot of confusion... People aren't sure what they can and can't legally say."

The trigger ban is just one part of a broader right-wing strategy to impose conservative ideological goals through invasive forms of coercion and encouragement of neighbours to report neighbours to the government. This strategy has been dubbed the "Snitch State".

Texas abortion criminal ban

Texas' abortion law, enacted in 2022, prohibits almost all abortions. Abortions are banned except in certain circumstances, such as when the life or health of the pregnant patient is at risk. The law is written ambiguously, and life-threatening or harmful pregnancies do not explicitly constitute an exception. The law does not make an exception for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest.

The law imposes various consequences for anyone who provides a prohibited abortion. Violators can be charged with a first or second-degree felony, and are subject to a civil penalty of at least $100,000, plus attorney's fees and court costs. A physician or healthcare professional in violation will have their license or permit revoked. While patients who receive an abortion are exempt from criminal penalties, they can be sued for wrongful death.

The Texas Supreme Court has upheld the state's criminalization of abortion. However, cities such as Austin, Dallas, Denton, El Paso, and Houston have instructed city officials to deprioritize the enforcement of the state's abortion laws. Despite this, anyone violating the state's abortion laws in those cities remains subject to criminal prosecution by the district attorney and civil penalties imposed by the state attorney general.

The impact of Texas' abortion law has been devastating. Women with health complications have been forced to leave the state or give birth while jeopardizing their health. The law has also led to an increase in infant deaths in Texas, with a 12.9% increase in infant deaths in the state between 2021 and 2022, compared to a 1.8% increase in the rest of the U.S. during the same period.

In addition to the human cost, the financial implications of the law are also significant. The state has allocated millions of dollars to fund alternative-to-abortion programs, while the cost of healthcare has increased due to the requirement for physicians to try to save the life of the fetus, even if it increases the risk to the pregnant patient.

The Texas abortion law has also had a chilling effect on free speech and personal freedom. People are afraid to discuss abortion or express pro-choice views for fear of being reported to the authorities. The law has created a culture of surveillance and encouraged neighbors to report on each other, with financial incentives offered to those who successfully sue someone who "aids or abets" an abortion.

The law has also had a detrimental impact on the education system, with teachers and librarians facing punishment for teaching or providing books that are deemed to promote pro-choice or LGBTQ ideologies.

Frequently asked questions