San Antonio has shut down its out-of-state abortion travel fund after a new Texas law that prohibits the use of public funds to cover abortions and a lawsuit from the state challenging the city’s fund.

City Council members last year approved $100,000 for its Reproductive Justice Fund to support abortion-related travel, prompting Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton to sue over allegations that the city was “transparently attempting to undermine and subvert Texas law and public policy.”

Paxton claimed victory in the lawsuit on Friday after the case was dismissed without a finding for either side.

WYOMING SUPREME COURT RULES LAWS RESTRICTING ABORTION VIOLATE STATE CONSTITUTION

“Texas respects the sanctity of unborn life, and I will always do everything in my power to prevent radicals from manipulating the system to murder innocent babies,” Paxton said in a statement. “It is illegal for cities to fund abortion tourism with taxpayer funds. San Antonio’s unlawful attempt to cover the travel and other expenses for out-of-state abortions has now officially been defeated.”

But San Antonio’s city attorney argued that the city did nothing wrong and pushed back on Paxton’s claim that the state won the lawsuit.

“This litigation was both initiated and abandoned by the State of Texas,” the San Antonio city attorney’s office said in a statement to The Texas Tribune. “In other words, the City did not drop any claims; the State of Texas, through the Texas Office of the Attorney General, dropped its claims.”

Paxton’s lawsuit argued that the travel fund violates the gift clause of the Texas Constitution. The state’s 15th Court of Appeals sided with Paxton and granted a temporary injunction in June to block the city from disbursing the fund while the case moved forward.

Gov. Greg Abbott in August signed into law Senate Bill 33, which bans the use of public money to fund “logistical support” for abortion. The law also allows Texas residents to file a civil suit if they believe a city violated the law.

“The City believed the law, prior to the passage of SB 33, allowed the uses of the fund for out-of-state abortion travel that were discussed publicly,” the city attorney’s office said in its statement. “After SB 33 became law and no longer allowed those uses, the City did not proceed with the procurement of those specific uses—consistent with its intent all along that it would follow the law.”

TRUMP URGES GOP TO BE ‘FLEXIBLE’ ON HYDE AMENDMENT, IGNITING BACKLASH FROM PRO-LIFE ALLIES

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The broader Reproductive Justice Fund remains, but it is restricted to non-abortion services such as home pregnancy tests, emergency contraception and STI testing.

The city of Austin also shut down its abortion travel fund after the law was signed. Austin had allocated $400,000 to its Reproductive Healthcare Logistics Fund in 2024 to help women traveling to other states for an abortion with funding for travel, food and lodging.

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta announced Sunday that he would not run for California governor, a decision grounded in his belief that his legal efforts combating the Trump administration as the state’s top prosecutor are paramount at this moment in history.

“Watching this dystopian horror come to life has reaffirmed something I feel in every fiber of my being: in this moment, my place is here — shielding Californians from the most brazen attacks on our rights and our families,” Bonta said in a statement. “My vision for the California Department of Justice is that we remain the nation’s largest and most powerful check on power.”

Bonta said that President Trump’s blocking of welfare funds to California and the fatal shooting of a Minnesota mother of three last week by a federal immigration agent cemented his decision to seek reelection to his current post, according to Politico, which first reported that Bonta would not run for governor.

Bonta, 53, a former state lawmaker and a close political ally to Gov. Gavin Newsom, has served as the state’s top law enforcement official since Newsom appointed him to the position in 2021. In the last year, his office has sued the Trump administration more than 50 times — a track record that would probably have served him well had he decided to run in a state where Trump has lost three times and has sky-high disapproval ratings.

Bonta in 2024 said that he was considering running. Then in February he announced he had ruled it out and was focused instead on doing the job of attorney general, which he considers especially important under the Trump administration. Then, both former Vice President Kamala Harris and Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) announced they would not run for governor, and Bonta began reconsidering, he said.

“I had two horses in the governor’s race already,” Bonta told The Times in November. “They decided not to get involved in the end. … The race is fundamentally different today, right?”

The race for California governor remains wide open. Newsom is serving the final year of his second term and is barred from running again because of term limits. Newsom has said he is considering a run for president in 2028.

Former Rep. Katie Porter — an early leader in polls — late last year faltered after videos emerged of her screaming at an aide and berating a reporter. The videos contributed to her dropping behind Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, a Republican, in a November poll released by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies and co-sponsored by The Times.

Porter rebounded a bit toward the end of the year, a poll by the Public Policy Institute of California showed, however none of the candidates has secured a majority of support and many voters remain undecided.

California hasn’t elected a Republican governor since 2006, Democrats heavily outnumber Republicans in the state, and many are seething with anger over Trump and looking for Democratic candidates willing to fight back against the current administration.

Bonta has faced questions in recent months about spending about $468,000 in campaign funds on legal advice last year as he spoke to federal investigators about alleged corruption involving former Oakland Mayor Sheng Thao, who was charged in an alleged bribery scheme involving local businessmen David Trung Duong and Andy Hung Duong. All three have pleaded not guilty.

According to his political consultant Dan Newman, Bonta — who had received campaign donations from the Duong family — was approached by investigators because he was initially viewed as a “possible victim” in the alleged scheme, though that was later ruled out. Bonta has since returned $155,000 in campaign contributions from the Duong family, according to news reports.

Bonta is the son of civil rights activists Warren Bonta, a white native Californian, and Cynthia Bonta, a native of the Philippines who immigrated to the U.S. on a scholarship in 1965. Bonta, a U.S. citizen, was born in Quezon City, Philippines, in 1972, when his parents were working there as missionaries, and immigrated with his family to California as an infant.

In 2012, Bonta was elected to represent Oakland, Alameda and San Leandro as the first Filipino American to serve in California’s Legislature. In Sacramento, he pursued a string of criminal justice reforms and developed a record as one of the body’s most liberal members.

Bonta is married to Assemblywoman Mia Bonta (D-Alameda), who succeeded him in the state Assembly, and the couple have three children.

Times staff writer Dakota Smith contributed to this report.

A federal judge in Washington state on Friday blocked the Trump administration from enforcing key parts of an executive order that sought to change how states administer federal elections, ruling the president lacked authority to apply those provisions to Washington and Oregon.

U.S. District Judge John Chun held that several provisions of Executive Order 14248 violated the separation of powers and exceeded the president’s authority.

“As stated by the Supreme Court, although the Constitution vests the executive power in the President, ‘[i]n the framework of our Constitution, the President’s power to see that the laws are faithfully executed refutes the idea that he is to be a lawmaker,’” Chun wrote in his 75-page ruling.

FEDERAL APPEALS COURT RULES AGAINST TRUMP’S BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP EXECUTIVE ORDER

White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson told Fox News Digital in a statement: “President Trump cares deeply about the integrity of our elections and his executive order takes lawful actions to ensure election security. This is not the final say on the matter and the Administration expects ultimate victory on the issue.”

Washington and Oregon filed a lawsuit in April contending the executive order signed by President Donald Trump in March violated the Constitution by attempting to set rules for how states conduct elections, including ballot counting, voter registration and voting equipment.

DOJ TARGETS NONCITIZENS ON VOTER ROLLS AS PART OF TRUMP ELECTION INTEGRITY PUSH

“Today’s ruling is a huge victory for voters in Washington and Oregon, and for the rule of law,” Washington Attorney General Nick Brown said in response to the Jan. 9 ruling, according to The Associated Press. “The court enforced the long-standing constitutional rule that only States and Congress can regulate elections, not the Election Denier-in-Chief.”

Executive Order 14248 directed federal agencies to require documentary proof of citizenship on federal voter registration forms and sought to require that absentee and mail-in ballots be received by Election Day in order to be counted.

The order also instructed the attorney general to take enforcement action against states that include such ballots in their final vote tallies if they arrive after that deadline.

“We oppose requirements that suppress eligible voters and will continue to advocate for inclusive and equitable access to registration while protecting the integrity of the process. The U.S. Constitution guarantees that all qualified voters have a constitutionally protected right to vote and to have their votes counted,” said Washington Secretary of State Steve Hobbs in a statement issued when the lawsuit was filed last year.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“We will work with the Washington Attorney General’s Office to defend our constitutional authority and ensure Washington’s elections remain secure, fair, and accessible,” Hobbs added.

Chun noted in his ruling that Washington and Oregon do not certify election results on Election Day, a practice shared by every U.S. state and territory, which allows them to count mail-in ballots received after Election Day as long as the ballots were postmarked on or before that day and arrived before certification under state law.