America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

At the request of the Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, The Texas Supreme Court has temporarily blocked a pregnant woman from obtaining an emergency abortion in a ruling issued late Friday.

The court froze a lower court’s ruling that would have allowed Kate Cox, who sued the state seeking a court-ordered abortion, to obtain the procedure. “Without regard to the merits, the Court administratively stays the district court’s December 7, 2023 order,” the order states.

The court noted the case would remain pending before them but did not include any timeline on when a full ruling might be issued. Cox is 20 weeks pregnant. Her unborn baby was diagnosed with a fatal genetic condition and she says complications in her pregnancy are putting her health at risk.

Following the ruling, Cox’s attorney said they remain hopeful the state’s request is quickly rejected. “We are talking about urgent medical care. Kate is already 20 weeks pregnant,” said Molly Duane, an attorney at the Center for Reproductive Rights. “This is why people should not need to beg for healthcare in a court of law.”

The ruling came just hours after Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton petitioned the high court to intervene in the case.

Paxton’s petition stemmed from a ruling on Thursday by a Texas judge who granted a 14-day temporary restraining order against the state’s abortion ban, so Cox could legally terminate her pregnancy.

The decision marked a significant development in the ongoing debate over the state’s medical exception to its controversial ban on abortions after six weeks – one of the strictest in the nation.

In the petition filings with the state Supreme Court, Paxton – who has threatened prosecution against anyone who helps facilitate the abortion – asked for an emergency stay of the district court judge’s ruling.

This undated handout photo provided courtesy of Kate Cox, shows Cox standing for a photo in Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas. Kate Cox, a 31-year-old mother-of-two from Dallas-Fort Worth, sued the state of Texas on December 5, 2023, in order to get an abortion for a pregnancy that she and her doctors say threatens her life and future fertility. Cox learned last week that her fetus has full trisomy 18, a condition that means her pregnancy may not survive until birth and if it does her baby would be stillborn or live for minutes, hours or days, according to the lawsuit. (Photo by HANDOUT / Kate Cox / AFP) / RESTRICTED TO EDITORIAL USE - MANDATORY CREDIT "AFP PHOTO / Kate Cox" - NO MARKETING NO ADVERTISING CAMPAIGNS - DISTRIBUTED AS A SERVICE TO CLIENTS (Photo by HANDOUT/Kate Cox/AFP via Getty Images)
A Texas judge ruled a pregnant woman who sued the state seeking an abortion can legally terminate her pregnancy
In a letter to three hospitals in Houston where, according to the Texas Medical Board, Cox’s physician has privileges, Paxton wrote Cox has failed to demonstrate she has a “life-threatening” medical condition related to her pregnancy or that her symptoms place her “at risk of death” or major bodily harm.

The state attorney general also warned the hospitals Thursday’s ruling “will not insulate you, or anyone else, from civil and criminal liability,” including first-degree felony prosecutions and civil penalties of at least $100,000 for each violation.

Cox sought an emergency hearing to obtain an abortion after learning her unborn baby had trisomy 18, a fatal genetic condition, and is not expected to live more than a few days outside the womb, according to the suit.

Cox, 31, has been to three different emergency rooms in the last month due to severe cramping and unidentifiable fluid leaks, according to her suit. She has had two prior caesarean surgeries – C-sections – and, the suit said, “continuing the pregnancy puts her at high risk for severe complications threatening her life and future fertility, including uterine rupture and hysterectomy.”

A ‘disregard’ for Cox’s life
Before the state’s Supreme Court weighed in, attorneys for Cox and the Center for Reproductive Rights, an abortion rights legal group representing Cox, said Paxton’s petition to block her procedure was “stunning” and showed a “disregard for Ms. Cox’s life, fertility, and the rule of law.”

“The State claims that it alone has the power to value Ms. Cox’s current nonviable pregnancy more highly than Ms. Cox’s own life and life of the future children she and her husband hope to have, regardless of Ms. Cox’s wishes for her family and the good faith advice of her medical team,” their response states.

The response goes on to say the plaintiffs agree the state Supreme Court should take urgent action, “specifically, to remind the Attorney General that he does not exist outside the systems of laws of which he is an officer, and that he must follow court orders just like the citizens he purports to serve.”

The filing also requests the state Supreme Court to reject Paxton’s threat of prosecution of the doctors and anyone else who helps facilitate the abortion.

Molly Duane, Cox’s attorney, would not say Thursday when and where Cox would be getting the abortion but said they planned to help get her the care “the fastest way” possible.

deflection! Irrelevant to THIS case... THIS one IS and is being prevented by a non medical professional... her doctors say this pregnancy threatens her life and future fertility... SHE WANTS to have more children and this is putting that possibility at risk...

So you believe a judge is more informed on the subject then that "one doctor"?

And it is not "one doctor" Cox is 20 weeks pregnant, and her fetus has trisomy 18, a deadly genetic condition. The Dallas-area mother of two has been admitted to emergency rooms four times in the past month — including one visit since the case was filed — after experiencing severe cramping and fluid leaks, attorney Molly Duane told the court Thursday.


Several doctors including her OB-GYN have advised Cox that there is "virtually no chance" her baby will survive and that carrying the pregnancy to term would make it less likely that she will be able to carry another child in the future, according to the complaint. Cox's pregnancy puts her health and fertility at risk for such problems as including gestational hypertension, gestational diabetes, uterine rupture from Caesarean section and post-operative infections, the complaint states.

Kate Cox, the plaintiff in the case, will be authorized to obtain an abortion once the temporary restraining order is signed Thursday.
More than 95% of fetuses with trisomy 18 do not survive to birth, or if they do, are likely to die within minutes or hours

The fact that it is a realistic option and need is Gross. The women is already ill, having to go to the hospital multiple times, already depressed over the need for the abortion to begin with and now may need to resort to something like this for a medically necessary procedure... things like this will come back to bite the GOP in Texas... and possibly the country.

I think it's curious that suddenly the pro-abortion movement is pleading for reasonable-ness. The main reason there were so many attacks against RvW was because the pro-abortion movement wanted to solidify 25th trimester abortions as normal and the pro-life crowd finally said "enough"...

Most Americans are in favor of "medically necessary" abortions, but you know the old saying - "Give them an inch and they take a mile..." and this is the backlash to pro-abortionist trying to take a mile.

I don't think I'll ever need an abortion

Short answer... all of the above... long answer is directly responsible are the Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, and the The Texas Supreme Court... indirectly, Every member of the GOP that has supported these laws as well as every voter that has elected these officials that have supported these laws...

House Republican Report Finds No Evidence of Wrongdoing by President Biden
After months of investigation and many public accusations of corruption against Mr. Biden and his family, the first report of the premier House G.O.P. inquiry showed no proof of such misconduct. The Republicans conceded that they had yet to find evidence of a specific corrupt action Mr. Biden took in office in connection with any of the business deals his son entered into. Instead, their presentation underscored how little headway top G.O.P. lawmakers have made in finding clear evidence of questionable transactions they can tie to Mr. Biden, their chief political rival.


Now... back to the conversation at hand instead of deflecting with idiotic nonsense... Pro choice advocates warned about this exact scenario when RvW was overturned... those that supported these laws in Texas and elsewhere said OH, NO we have provisions for those things.... except now the the Texas AG doesn't want to allow for those provisions... which could cause this women her life or the possibility of mothering more children in the future...

Do you actually believe that? I mean... really?

WOW.

my typo may be leading to confusion (I am a terrible typist)...

My passage that you quoted should have read:
"Most Americans are in favor of "medically necessary" abortions, but you know the old saying - "Give them an inch and they take a mile..." and this is the backlash to pro-abortionistS trying to take a mile.

My comment was an analysis of the macro perspective, not speaking specifically to this one woman, who is feeling the micro effect of the macro perspective.

Your Mind will never be changed... if the multiple doctors specific to her case and the well documented information related to trisomy 18 are not enough then nothing will ever be.

This was a political stunt lawsuit to try to widen the ” medical exemption “ back to abortion for convenience.

i am curious what part of this case makes you believe that and what medical training you have that lends any validity to that claim?

She had no choice but to go to another state... She waited until the day the court ruled to over ride the original allowance. most likely her lawyers had already advised her that she was going to lose the case and what do you know... that day... she did... so she went to another state and did was needed for her health based on Drs recommendations


the lawsuit seems pretty clear and needed to me... the law allows for exceptions yet, it seems those exceptions will never be granted...

I find it not fascinating that people would use this poor woman to bash Trump...

Poor Trump....

Brewha..!!

I want Women and Doctors to be able to make relevant medical decisions that may potential save a life or at minimum preserve the ability to try for another child in the future when the current fetus is considered medically non viable and even IF it survives without killing the mother has a less than zero chance of ever being a functioning adult... instead of Politicians and judges making that decision...

I know someone who carried a baby with trisomy 18 to full term and delivered it. The child lived four hours. The child has a name, had a funeral, and has a grave.

It could have been aborted for convenience but was not.

LMAO yeah Gene is the biggest dummy 🤣

Let me ask how any of our opinions affect Texas law and the recent SCOTUS decision? And let’s not pretend this isn’t what this publicity isn’t for a reason other than a very sympathetic situation.

Was she devoid of knowledge of SCOTUS and Texas law? Did she not know from the doctors there was an issue till this late. No I’m not rereading anything.

Some of us have a natural born right that actually is enumerated specifically that people are trying to take away and I don’t get this kind of sympathy….

I know someone that jumped from a plane with a faulty parachute and lived to tell about it... doesn't mean i or any Dr. would recommend it... See different people in similar but different circumstances should not use anecdotal evidence to make choices that could affect the rest of your life (or kill you)...

I also know someone who jumped from a plane with a faulty parachute. The rip cord came completely unattached but it did pop the chute enough.


Since this story is leaving the news cycle rapidly, let’s sum up:


Texas does not require court pre-approval for a life saving abortion.

The person from Dallas doctor-shopped to Houston to find a doctor who would sign-on to the first in the nation lawsuit and found pro-abortion lawyers. Then they sued for pre-approval.

She already left the state to get an abortion prior to the Supreme Court ruling.

Texas state law does not recognize the right to an abortion of convenience after 6 weeks of pregnancy if the fetus has a high likelihood of being handicapped or have undesirable traits or just be impactful on resources and climate change. Plenty of states do.

This is the first of many lawsuits to attempt to reinstate abortion on demand.

It is outrageous.

Preach on!

…sometimes you gotta break a few eggs…err…well you know.