By: Joel Mathis

‘A deep breath’
There are some skeptics of the new ordinances in the anti-abortion movement. World, a conservative Christian news site, reported that one doubter is Paul Linton, special counsel for Texas Alliance for Life. He said a travel ban “in large ­measure, is unconstitutional” because of the right to travel. Then again, it’s not clear whom pro-choice groups might sue in order to overturn the ordinances: Like the state’s abortion ban, the travel bans are designed to be enforced not by government officials but by private individuals suing in civil courts.

By: Hannah Tiede

Anti-abortion advocates say the money should have gone to pregnancy care centers.

“We are tremendously disappointed, but not surprised,” said Amy O’Donnell with Texas Alliance for Life. “What is important to note is that another law was passed, I believe two sessions ago, bans contracts between cities or municipalities and abortion providers and their affiliates. Now, there is somewhat of a loophole there that some of the side logistics funding organizations fall under. We are working to close that loophole because that will address some of what we are seeing with these city budget attempts to fund abortion travel.”

Mayor Ron Nirenberg told KENS 5 the city is complying with state and federal law.

By: David Montgomery

Joe Pojman, founder and executive director of the Texas Alliance for Life, one of the state’s leading anti-abortion rights groups, also defended the medical exception. “The law is already clear,” he said. “Judges are supposed to interpret the law, not rewrite the law.”

The suit names the state of Texas, the Texas Medical Board and Board Executive Director Stephen Brint Carlton as defendants. Attorney General Ken Paxton, a Republican, is also a defendant, though he is currently suspended pending a state Senate trial on impeachment charges alleging bribery and other wrongdoing.

Lawyers for the attorney general’s office, who could not be reached for comment, are asking the court to dismiss the suit. In a rebuttal petition, they accuse the plaintiffs of staging “splashy news conferences and media tours” to get a favorable court ruling “after failing to convince the Legislature to adopt their preferred version of the medical exception.”

A proposed court order by the plaintiffs asks the court to give physicians discretion to use “good faith judgment” in providing abortion care to someone withunsafe pregnancy complications or instances in which a fetus is unlikely to survive the pregnancy or live after birth.

By: Noah DeGarmo

Joe Pojman, executive director of Texas Alliance for Life, told The Dallas Express his anti-abortion organization “favored those exceptions in law because we want to make sure that doctors can treat a woman whose pregnancy is endangering her life.”

He described HB 3058 as “an attempt to clarify” those exceptions.

“I’m grateful that the governor [and] the legislature [are] taking particular care to try and clarify what’s already in law,” said Pojman. “But I point out, it’s already in law, and doctors were already immune from prosecution or civil liability.”

By: Mary Tuma

In fact, a handful of Texas Republicans recently stood with one of the largest anti-abortion groups in the state to reaffirm that they would not be pursuing these exceptions. “Our laws are very clear,” said Amy O’Donnell of Texas Alliance for Life. “We have heard stories of doctors who say they need further clarification but we believe that that clarification should come…from various [hospital] boards. The laws do not need to be changed.”