Texas Supreme Court hears case brought by women denied abortions despite risks to health

Read the Full Transcript

• Geoff Bennett:

  The Texas Supreme Court today heard arguments in a case brought by a group of 20 women who say they have been denied emergency care because of the state's abortion laws, some of the nation's most restrictive.

  They argue that the medical exceptions in the state's abortion bans are too narrow to protect patients who face pregnancy complications. The case marks the first time patients denied abortions have sued a state since Roe was overturned.

  Taylor Edwards, who is one of the plaintiffs, and Molly Duane, their lead attorney, join us now.

  Thank you both for being with us.

  And, Taylor, we will start with you. Tell us your story about why you had to leave Texas and go to Colorado to receive care.

• Taylor Edwards, Plaintiff:

  Hi. Thanks so much for having me.

  I guess I can start my story back through — I went through a long IVF journey to get pregnant in the first place. It was actually our third embryo transfer that worked. And so we were highly monitored throughout the pregnancy and everything was going really smoothly, until we got to our anatomy scan.

  And we — at our anatomy scan, we were given a fatal diagnosis of an encephalocele. And so she was essentially never going to live if she made it to birth. And having to kind of sit there with your doctor and them tell you, we can't help you, here's a number to call, that's kind of what we were left with after that appointment.

  And so we had to call out of state. We had to go to New Mexico first. We tried to get a clinic. We had an appointment with a clinic there. And three hours before we were supposed to board a plane to New Mexico, they canceled the appointment due to a shortage of medication.

  So we were left to kind of scramble. I was 18 weeks pregnant at that point and trying to — like, I was worried I was going to be too far along. It was a whole thing. And so I tried to find another clinic in New Mexico that was available, and there was none. And so we had to rebook everything to go to Colorado just to receive medical care.

  I mean, it took a feat to get through all of that logistics. And traveling is stressful enough already when you're even just like going on vacation. So going through the most traumatic experience of your life while traveling is just an extra layer.

• Geoff Bennett:

  Did the doctor in Texas explicitly say that they could not provide care because of the state's abortion laws?

• Taylor Edwards:

  Yes, he said: "My hands are tied. If this would have happened a year-and-a-half ago, I would have been able to provide you an abortion in the hospital here with your doctor."

• Geoff Bennett:

  Molly, how common are stories like Taylor's?

  Molly Duane, Senior Staff Attorney, Center for Reproductive Rights: Well, Taylor's story is horrible, but it is not unique, unfortunately. This is something that is happening daily in places like Texas, along with all the other states, 13, 14 states in the United States, where abortion is now banned.

  And while there are technically medical exceptions on the books, as Taylor's experience shows, they simply do not function in practice.

• Geoff Bennett:

  So what then is the ultimate goal with this lawsuit, Molly?

• Molly Duane:

  Well, the goal with this lawsuit is so that people like Taylor will not have to go through the extreme trauma that she went through.

  We have, in this case, it began with five women. It is now up to 20 women, which just shows how widespread the problem is in Texas, as well as other states around the country. And the goal is to help women, right, and to make sure that doctors can actually provide medical care, which is what an abortion is.

  It is standard reproductive medical care that women and pregnant people routinely need for any number of reasons. And, in some ways, this lawsuit is very small. It is just about being able to make sure that the medical exception that exists under Texas' law actually functions in practice.

  But, in other ways, it is quite large, because Taylor and her co-plaintiffs are showing an unbelievable amount of bravery and self-sacrifice to tell their stories publicly, so that the public can understand abortion is health care. And what is happening in states across the country is unconscionable and should not continue anymore.

• Geoff Bennett:

  What are the penalties for physicians who violate Texas' abortion laws?

• Molly Duane:

  They could not be more extreme.

  We are talking about life in prison, loss of medical license, and hundreds of thousands of dollars in civil fines. So, quite understandably, physicians are terrified. They don't know when or how close to death a patient needs to be before they can provide abortion care. And they have been begging the Texas Medical Board and the rest of the state for guidance for years.

  And it has fallen on deaf ears. So here we are. We came to court. Courts are places that can vindicate constitutional rights, and Taylor has constitutional rights, just like everyone else in Texas.

• Geoff Bennett:

  The assistant attorney general in Texas makes the point that the law is clear enough, in that the problem, if there is one, lies with the doctors.

  Here's what she had to say earlier.

• Beth Klusmann, Texas Assistant Attorney General:

  If, as she said, a woman is bleeding or has amniotic fluid running down her legs, then the problem is not with the law. That is with the doctors. I mean, that woman clearly would qualify for medical emergency exception.

  And so if she has to come to court to make that happen, that is not the state's fault.

• Geoff Bennett:

  So, Molly, what's your response to that argument?

• Molly Duane:

  Well, my response is that the state has been saying over and over again the exception is clear, yet they have never once told us what they think the exception means.

  In fact, contrary to what they said today, they have made every attempt to show that amniotic fluid does in fact need to be running down a patient's leg before they can come to court.

  What Taylor said that her doctor said to her is verbatim what I have heard from every single one of my clients, which is, my doctor said that her hands were tied. And who tied them? It was the state of Texas.

• Geoff Bennett:

  Taylor, how did you hear about this lawsuit and why did you feel compelled to join it?

• Taylor Edwards:

  Yes, so as soon as we got home from Colorado, I contacted multiple news outlets, because I felt like people needed to know. I felt like there's surely no way that people under — and that this is happening and people just don't know about it, because it's so horrible.

  So I contacted local station FOX 7 here in Austin. My husband and I gave an interview, I think, weeks after we got back from Colorado. And Molly saw that interview and reached out to me. And I knew immediately I wanted to join the suit. I mean, it wasn't even a question, because I went public with my story to make change and to bring awareness. And that's what this lawsuit is doing.

  I think it's really important. All of our stories are different and horrifying, but very, very important.

• Geoff Bennett:

  How are you and your husband doing now?

• Taylor Edwards:

  We're hanging in there. I'm actually currently pregnant. My last IVF transfer worked, after we — four months after we lost our daughter. So that's been a new experience.

  Yes, it's been tough. Being pregnant in Texas again is really scary, and I don't have any living children, or I wouldn't have gone through this again, because it's just a really scary time to be a pregnant person in Texas.

• Geoff Bennett:

  Taylor Edwards, thank you for sharing your story with us. And, Molly Duane, thank you for your time. We appreciate it.

• Molly Duane:

  Thank you.

• Taylor Edwards:

  Thanks.