Texas Abortion Law: Constitutional Conundrum Explained

The Texas abortion law, enacted in 2022, prohibits almost all abortions, with exceptions made if the pregnant patient's life is at risk or they have a life-threatening condition. The law has been criticised for its ambiguity regarding medical exceptions, with abortion rights activists struggling to curb the tide of restrictions that have come into force in most Republican-led states since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022. The law has been deemed patently unconstitutional by some, while others have praised it as a successful model for other Republican-led states to follow.

The Texas Heartbeat Bill

The bill allows any private citizen, except for state or local government employees, to sue anyone who "performs or induces an abortion" or "aids or abets the performance or inducement of an abortion". Successful plaintiffs are entitled to a minimum of $10,000, as well as legal fees. Notably, the bill does not allow for the prosecution of the woman receiving the abortion.

The bill has been subject to several legal challenges, including a temporary injunction in August 2023 that allowed Texans with complicated pregnancies to get abortions if their doctor believed it was necessary. However, the Texas Supreme Court has ruled that the plaintiffs have not shown that the law is unconstitutional.

The Texas Supreme Court's ruling on medical exceptions

The Texas Supreme Court has been involved in several rulings on medical exceptions to the state's abortion ban. Here is a summary of the key rulings:

In re State of Texas, No. 23-0994 (December 2023)

In this case, the Texas Supreme Court heard the lawsuit of Kate Cox, who requested authorisation to terminate her pregnancy after learning that her unborn child had full trisomy 18, a fatal condition. The Court recognised that only a doctor could decide if a pregnant woman had a life-threatening condition necessitating an abortion. However, in this case, the doctor did not attest that the unborn child's condition posed a direct threat to Cox's life or health, and therefore, the Court did not grant the pre-authorisation Cox sought.

Zurawski v. State (May 2024)

In this case, twenty women and two doctors challenged the Texas abortion law, arguing that its restrictions caused significant harm by preventing doctors from performing medically necessary abortions. The Texas Supreme Court ruled that the law, as written, permits life-saving abortions and that doctors would misinterpret the law if they declined to perform an abortion when the mother's life is endangered. The Court concluded that the plaintiffs had not proven that the Texas abortion law was unconstitutional.

Emergency Abortion Case (October 2024)

The Texas Supreme Court declined to intervene in an emergency abortion case, leaving in place a lower court ruling that rejected the Biden administration's claim that federal law requires access to emergency abortion care, even in states with strict abortion bans. The Court's decision aligned with the Texas Attorney General's argument that the state's abortion law allows for abortion when necessary to prevent a serious risk of "substantial impairment of a major bodily function."

Overall Impact

The Texas Supreme Court's rulings on medical exceptions have significant implications for pregnant women facing health complications and medical professionals providing abortion care. The Court's interpretation of the law's exceptions has been a key factor in shaping abortion access and reproductive rights in the state.

The Biden administration's request to block a lower court ruling barring emergency abortions

The Biden administration has been trying to enforce federal guidance requiring hospitals to perform abortions if needed to stabilize a patient's emergency medical condition. This comes after the Supreme Court's conservative majority overturned the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling, which had legalized abortion nationwide.

The Biden administration issued guidance in July 2022 to protect access to abortion, reminding healthcare providers of their obligations under the 1986 federal law called the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA). EMTALA ensures that Medicare-participating hospitals offer emergency care to stabilize patients regardless of their ability to pay. The guidance made clear that under EMTALA, physicians must provide a woman with an abortion if needed to resolve a medical emergency and stabilize the patient, even in states where the procedure is banned.

However, the state of Texas, along with two anti-abortion medical associations, sued the administration, arguing that the guidance unlawfully compels healthcare providers to perform abortions. In 2022, U.S. District Judge James Wesley Hendrix blocked the enforcement of this guidance, finding that it is an unlawful interpretation of the EMTALA statute and would allow abortions beyond what is permitted by Texas law. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld this decision in January 2023, ruling that EMTALA does not mandate any specific type of medical treatment and never requires pregnancy termination.

The Biden administration appealed to the Supreme Court to block the lower court's ruling, but the Supreme Court declined to intervene in October 2024. The Supreme Court's decision left a lower-court ruling in place, which rejected the Biden administration's claim that federal law requires access to emergency abortion care, even in states with strict abortion bans. This means that, for now, Texas hospitals cannot be federally required to provide abortions when they conflict with the state's abortion ban.

The Biden administration's efforts to ensure access to emergency abortions in Texas have been met with resistance from the state and anti-abortion groups, resulting in a series of legal challenges and rulings that have ultimately upheld Texas's restrictive abortion laws.

The Texas law's constitutionality in light of Roe v. Wade

The Texas abortion law prohibits physicians from performing abortions once a fetal heartbeat is detected. The law came into effect on September 1, 2021, and has sparked heated debates and legal challenges. The law is part of a broader push by Republicans to impose new restrictions on abortion.

The Texas Heartbeat Bill became state law with a trigger in place that subjected it to a Supreme Court ruling, which has now effectively enabled it. The Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade in 1973 ruled that the Constitution of the United States generally protected a right to have an abortion. The decision struck down many abortion laws and caused an ongoing abortion debate in the United States. The Supreme Court overruled Roe in 2022, ending the constitutional right to abortion.

The Texas abortion law does not create a criminal cause of action against the mother or parent. However, it does create a criminal cause of action against doctors. Under the new Texas abortion law, the woman who had the abortion cannot be prosecuted, but anyone who provided or aided in her abortion is open to criminal prosecution. The Texas legislature passed the trigger law on abortion in 2021, which opens up doctors and medical staff to criminal prosecution and allows for civil lawsuits against the same party.

The Texas abortion law is constitutional in light of Roe v. Wade as the Supreme Court overruled Roe in 2022, ending the constitutional right to abortion. The Texas abortion law prohibits physicians from performing abortions once a fetal heartbeat is detected, which is usually around six weeks and before many women know they are pregnant. The Texas law is part of a broader push by Republicans nationwide to impose new restrictions on abortion. The Supreme Court's decision allows states to set their own abortion laws, and the Texas Supreme Court has upheld the Texas abortion law. However, the law has been criticised for not providing clear exceptions and adequately protecting the lives of pregnant mothers.

The Texas abortion law is constitutional as the Supreme Court has overruled Roe v. Wade, ending the constitutional right to abortion. The Texas law prohibits abortions after a fetal heartbeat is detected and is part of a broader push by Republicans to impose new restrictions on abortion. The Supreme Court's decision allows states to set their own abortion laws, and the Texas Supreme Court has upheld the Texas abortion law. However, the law has been criticised for not providing clear exceptions and adequately protecting the lives of pregnant mothers.

The impact of the Texas abortion law on medical professionals

The Texas abortion law has had a significant impact on medical professionals, who face criminal prosecution and civil lawsuits for performing abortions. The law prohibits physicians from carrying out the procedure once a fetal heartbeat is detected, which is usually around six weeks into a pregnancy. This has created uncertainty and confusion among doctors, as the language used in the law is vague, and they are unsure of when they can legally terminate a pregnancy.

The Texas abortion law exposes medical professionals to criminal and civil liability, with doctors and medical staff facing criminal prosecution and civil lawsuits. The law creates a second-degree felony for anyone who "knowingly performs, induces, or attempts an abortion," with the penalty increased to a first-degree felony if the unborn child dies, resulting in a potential sentence of five to 99 years in prison. The law also allows any private citizen to sue those who perform abortions after a fetal heartbeat is detected, with a civil penalty of $10,000, as well as court costs and attorney fees.

The law's vague language and exceptions have left doctors unsure of how to interpret and apply them. For example, the law allows for abortion when necessary to prevent a serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function, but it is unclear how this exception is to be interpreted and applied in practice. This uncertainty has made it difficult for doctors to know when they can legally terminate a pregnancy, even in emergency situations where the life of the mother is at risk.

Furthermore, the Texas abortion law has had a chilling effect on the provision of abortion services by medical professionals. Many clinics have stopped offering abortion services due to fear of prosecution under Texas law, limiting access to abortion for women in the state. This has resulted in women seeking abortions outside of Texas or, in some cases, being forced to continue their pregnancies against their wishes.

Frequently asked questions