Texas Supreme Court hears arguments in abortion law challenge

Texas Supreme Court hears challenge to abortion law

The state’s abortion laws were challenged Tuesday before the Texas Supreme Court. Lawyers made their cases in a fight that’s been going on for months over a law that the plaintiffs argue is too vague.

DALLAS - The state’s abortion laws were challenged on Tuesday before the Texas Supreme Court. Lawyers will be making their cases in a fight that’s been going on for months.

The lawsuit involves Texas women who were denied abortions despite serious pregnancy complications, including some who nearly died.

The 20 woman challenging the law say they were unable to get health care they needed for their medically complex pregnancies due to the statute's vague language.

Many of them traveled to the state capitol on Tuesday for the hearing.

"I needed an abortion for a fetal abnormality where I was told my child would be born and suffocate to death, and then I could choose end of life care for my child," said one of the women.

The lawsuit was first filed by the Center for Reproductive Rights in March.

"While there are technically medical exceptions to the bans, no one knows what it means and the state won't tell us," Duane said.

That claim is in dispute. An attorney representing the Office of the Attorney General argued that state laws do provide enough guidance for doctors to make appropriate safety decisions.

"As long as your judgement is reasonable you should be fine under this law," said assistant attorney general Beth Klusmann.

Texas prohibits nearly all abortions, except in medical emergencies, which the laws do not specifically define.

Doctors face up to 99 years in prison and the loss of their medical license for violations.

This case made it to the state's highest court after a district court injunction provided limited protection for doctors who terminate complicated pregnancies.

Attorney General Ken Paxton appealed that decision, blocking it from taking effect.

The nine Republican justices must decide if the plaintiffs have legal standing.

"I'm struggling to understand your standing argument that these women don't have standing to bring these claims seeking clarity on what the three laws do and don't allow," said Justice Jeff Boyd during the hearing.

"They're seeking clarity, not for their own circumstances, they're asking the court to declare that the law means what," responded Klusmann.

Constitutional law attorney David Coale, who is not affiliated with the case, has been monitoring it closely.

"This is the the big leagues in Texas," he said.

Coale says the conservative justices will have a pre-disposition to side with the state, but added that the plaintiffs presented a strong argument.

"People kept their cards pretty close to their chest, though. If someone had a very clear point of view about the law, that didn't really come out," Coale noted.

The court did not issue a decision on Tuesday.

Coale says the court likes to issue its opinions before the end of the term, which isn't until June of next year.