An abortion case in Texas could affect maternal rights across the U.S.

Last week, the country watched one of the most high-profile abortion cases since the removal of Roe v. Wade unfold. A Texas woman filed to terminate her high-risk pregnancy, and days later, the Texas Supreme Court stepped in to block the procedure.

Kate Cox, a 34-year-old mother, filed a lawsuit Dec. 5 to end a pregnancy that doctors and she say could threaten her future fertility and life. A district court judge ruled Cox could legally terminate her pregnancy; however, after the ruling, the Texas Supreme Court stepped in and ruled the state’s law for abortion exceptions does not apply to Cox’s case.

Here is a look at Cox’s story, Texas abortion laws and what this case means for the country in a post-Roe v. Wade world.

Cox’s struggle became national news just days after she filed a lawsuit asking a Texas court to allow her to terminate her pregnancy, which would be an exception to Texas law. At the time of filing her suit, she was 20 weeks pregnant. Cox asked for the exception because her fetus was diagnosed with trisomy 18 –a rare and deadly genetic condition.

Trisomy 18, also known as Edwards syndrome, is a chromosomal condition that can cause heart defects and other organ abnormalities. Most pregnancies with trisomy 18 end in miscarriage or stillbirth. Of the babies that do survive to full term, only 10% live past their first birthday, according to the Cleveland Clinic.

“I’m trying to do what is best for my baby daughter and myself and my family, but we are suffering because of the laws in Texas,” Cox wrote in an op-ed for the Dallas Morning News about her abortion fight. “I do not want my baby to arrive in this world only to watch her suffer.”

When Cox initially sued, District Court Judge Maya Guerra Gamble ruled Cox could terminate her pregnancy due to her health complications.

“The idea that Mrs. Cox wants desperately to be a parent and this law might actually cause her to lose that ability is shocking and would be a genuine miscarriage of justice,” Gamble said in her ruling.

After Gamble’s ruling, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton petitioned for immediate intervention from the Texas Supreme Court because he said Cox and her lawyers did not demonstrate that her pregnancy was a danger to her life.

On Dec. 11, the court and its nine Republican justices ruled, siding with Paxton, and said Cox could not get an abortion in Texas. In an opinion, the court also said a pregnant woman does not need a court order to have a lifesaving abortion, but, instead, a physician must determine “that one is needed under the appropriate legal standard, using reasonable medical judgment.”

According to their ruling, Cox’s case did not constitute an appropriate and reasonable medical judgment.

“But frankly, the court system, the political system, the infrastructure entirely in Texas had already failed Kate and her family,” Cox’s attorney Molly Duane told CNN.

Last Monday, Cox’s attorneys announced she had left the state to undergo her abortion in another state.

The case has become an example of what could follow as states are left to their own discretion to decide what exactly constitutes a “life-threatening” condition when it comes to women’s pregnancies.

Like Texas, Indiana has a near-total abortion ban. The procedure is only allowed, “if the pregnant person’s serious health or life is at risk; if there’s a lethal fetal anomaly up to 20 weeks post-fertilization; and in cases of rape or incest, but only up to 10 weeks,” according to NPR.

In Cox’s case, her condition could affect her ability to have more children and could lead to infections and further complications down the line.

Contact Racial Justice Reporter Garrett Simms at 317-762-7847.