Texas Appeals Temporary Injunction Barring Enforcement of Texas Abortion Law

Texas has appealed a district judge’s ruling of an emergency injunction on the state’s restrictive abortion law to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

A federal judge issued a temporary injunction Wednesday night that prevents enforcement of Texas’ controversial new abortion law.

The law, which entered into force on September 1, after the Supreme Court refused to stop himDoctors prevent abortions once they detect a so-called fetal heartbeat – which can be seen on ultrasound as early as six weeks into the pregnancy.

The Unprecedented law, known as SB8, effectively prevents women in Texas from obtaining a prior abortion, a right protected by the US Constitution — a fact the judge noted in his motion to grant Biden administration request for a court order.

“From the moment the Eighth Session entered into force, women have been unlawfully prevented from exercising control over their lives in ways protected by the Constitution,” U.S. District Court Judge Robert Pittman wrote in the 113-page ruling. “That other courts find a way to avoid this conclusion is their decision; this court will not punish another day for this arbitrary denial of such an important right.”

In addition to the emergency order, Pittman denied Texas’ request to suspend his sentence while the state appeals to him.

“Tonight’s ruling is an important step forward toward restoring women’s constitutional rights throughout Texas. SB 8 does not flagrantly violate the right to safe and legal abortion established under Roe v. Wade, but creates a blueprint to allow private citizens to Jane Psaki said in a statement Wednesday evening “to interfere with this right and evade judicial review.” “The fight has just begun, both in Texas and in many states across this country where women’s rights are currently under attack. That’s why the President supports the codification of Roe v. Wade, the reason he has directed a full government response to SB 8, and why he will continue to stand shoulder to shoulder with women across the country to protect their constitutional rights.”

By law, private citizens can sue someone they “reasonably believe” provided an illegal abortion or helped someone obtain it in the state. Texas Lawyers He said in court Friday They had no clear way of knowing how they would enforce an injunction, as the law was drafted to prevent any government official, other than judges, from Responsible for enforcement.

Pittman outlined the criteria in his ruling, writing that the court “has the power to issue orders to individuals who act on behalf of the State or act in concert with the State,” and that “an injunction would be proportionate to the scope of the recommendations of Subsidiary Eight to grant enforcement power.”

Furthermore, the state must “publish this preliminary injunction on all public-facing court websites with instructions that are visible and easily understandable to the public that SB 8 lawsuits will not be admissible by Texas courts” and “must inform all states of court judges and court clerks.” state from this preliminary injunction and they shall distribute this preliminary injunction to all state court judges and state court clerks.”

US Attorney Merrick Garland called the ruling “a victory for Texas women and the rule of law.”

“It is the Department of Justice’s primary responsibility to defend the Constitution,” Garland said in a statement. “We will continue to protect constitutional rights against all those who seek to undermine them,” he added.

Since the law came into force, women have had to travel hundreds if not thousands of miles miscarriageWhich led to the flooding of abortion clinics in neighboring countries. Abortion providers in Texas have also warned that due to the law, some clinics may have to close permanently.

Texas is likely to appeal the ruling immediately. For now, it’s unclear whether providers in the state will resume offering abortions after a “fetal heartbeat” is detected, according to one of the legal experts.

Steve Vladeck, a professor of constitutional law at the University of Texas, said, “One of the many new provisions in #SB8 states that abortions performed while an initial injunction is in effect can *remain* grounds for liability if the injunction is subsequently suspended/revoked.” a Posted on Twitter.

Abortion rights advocates expressed satisfaction with the ruling, while noting that the ban on the law is only temporary.

Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights said in a statement.

The Texas Right to Life anti-abortion group responded to the ruling Wednesday night, saying he was “not surprised.”

“This is the legacy of Roe v. Wade: Judges who care about the abortion industry, first formulate a conclusion and then dig deep into the legal literature for a rationale later,” He said on Twitter.

“Pro-Life attorneys are expected to appeal the decision immediately, as we expect a fair hearing,” she added.

Several state lawmakers said they plan to Working to reverse the near-total ban on abortion — although Pittman said the initial injunction, “if it persists, dissuades states from doing so.”

“[If] Legislators know that they cannot accomplish political agendas that limit or eliminate constitutional rights and intentionally remove legal remedy to challenge them, and so other states are less likely to engage in counterfeit legislation.”

ABC News’ Alexander Malin, Devin Dwyer, and Evan Pereira contributed to this report.

This is an evolving story. . Please check back for updates

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *