By: Adela Uchida

“Now we’re seeing those drugs trafficked illegally into our state. Right now, in Houston, we see a lawsuit by a husband against three women because they helped his wife obtain an abortion,” said Amy O’Donnell with Texas Alliance For Life. “We’re excited to see where that case goes, what we hear. The reality of it is they do harm women.”

RELATED| Split opinions over the three women sued for wrongful death following abortion

O’Donnell says studies in Finland show up to 40 percent of women who take abortion drugs have complications, but the National Institutes of Health says abortion pills have a two percent complication rate. First-trimester surgical abortions have a 1.3 percent complication rate.

By: Amy O'Donnell

When we heard about Amanda Zurawski’s case specifically, my organization consulted with six well-informed doctors in this area of medicine. When Zurawski was in her 18th week, well before viability, she suffered from a rare but severe condition known as preterm premature rupture of membranes, or PPROM. In other words, her water broke. Because the unborn baby was so young, there was little chance for her baby to survive. Without intervention, Zurawski’s life was in danger from infection. All six doctors said the standard of care is to induce labor with the intent to save the mother’s life, knowing that, sadly, the unborn child would not survive, and to do so without waiting until the woman’s death is imminent or for the baby’s heart to stop beating. All confirmed this is permitted under Texas law.

Unfortunately, that is not what her physician did. Her doctor waited until Ms. Zurawski developed sepsis before providing the appropriate treatment. Tragically, she lost her baby, and she almost lost her life. But that had nothing to do with Texas law. It is a dangerous lie that lifesaving care is not permitted under Texas pro-life laws. The language of the life of the mother exception in Texas law is clear: no woman with a life-threatening pregnancy should be required to wait before receiving treatment from her physician.

Much misinformation and confusion have been widely perpetuated regarding the life of the mother exception within Texas pro-life laws. However, Texas’ laws are carefully crafted to allow doctors to promptly treat women with life-threatening conditions without the risk of criminal or civil liability. The exception language in our more recent laws is the same language put into law in 2013 to protect unborn babies from abortion beginning at 20 weeks. No physician has been prosecuted for performing abortions to save the mother’s life under that law.

By: Brandon Drey

Texas passed a trigger law making performing an abortion a crime punishable by up to life in prison, ABC reported. The law, however, did not go into effect until August 2022, which makes the legality of the case controversial.

Joe Pojman with Texas Alliance for Life told Fox 29 that the legal action could set a precedent for future cases.

“I hope the unborn children’s lives are not taken but if they are, this could be a really important example for someone,” Pojman said. “I’m hopeful this could mean justice for the unborn child, I’m hopeful that for father of the child could get some kind of compensation for it such that this would never ever happen again.”

Charles “Rocky” Rhodes, a South Texas College of Law law professor, told ABC he believes the lawsuit could gain traction.

“It’s scary to think that you can be sued for significant damages for helping a friend undertake acts that help her have even a self-medicated abortion,” Rhodes said. “Obviously, the allegations would have to be proven, but there is potentially merit to this suit under Texas’ abortion laws as they exist now.”

By: Juan Garcia de Paredes

The Texas Alliance for Life, a nonprofit organization that describes itself as pro-life, sued the San Antonio City Clerk and the San Antonio City Council on Feb. 9, alleging the proposed charter amendment violates the Texas Local Government Code, which prohibits multiple-subject charter amendments. The single-subject rule requires ballot initiatives to address a single subject, topic, or issue. Of the 26 states that provide for citizen-initiated ballot measures, 17 of those states have single-subject rules. While Texas does not provide for statewide citizen initiatives, Texas law requires local charter amendments to include only one subject.

AUSTIN – Attorney General Paxton has filed an amicus letter brief in the Texas Supreme Court to stop an unlawful charter amendment from being placed on the ballots of San Antonio, Texas voters in the upcoming May 2023 municipal general election. The letter brief was filed in support of the Texas Alliance for Life’s challenge to the charter amendment, which contains numerous left-wing policy initiatives.

To ensure that charter amendments are clear and that voters can make their voices heard, Texas state law requires charter amendments to include only one subject. But San Antonio’s proposed charter amendment does not accord with this long-standing legal requirement, as it contains a multitude of different topics.

Even the San Antonio City Attorney has acknowledged that the proposed amendment presents at least six subjects, among them changes to policies regarding abortion, marijuana, no-knock warrants, chokeholds, the creation of a new municipal government position, and a reduction in criminal penalties for numerous state-law crimes.