Connect with us

Austin, TX

Some state abortion bans stir confusion, and it's uncertain if lawmakers will clarify them

Published

on

Some state abortion bans stir confusion, and it's uncertain if lawmakers will clarify them


Kaitlyn Kash and husband Cory Kash sit at home with their 4-month-old daughter, Sunday, Dec. 17, 2023, in Austin, Texas. Kaitlyn Kash has joined as a plaintiff on the Zurawski v. State of Texas case, a lawsuit that looks to clarify the scope of the state’s abortion ban.Stephen Spillman/AP

Ever since the nation’s highest court ended abortion rights more than a year ago, vaguely worded bans enacted in some Republican-controlled states have caused bewilderment over how exceptions should be applied.

Supporters have touted these exemptions, tucked inside statutes restricting abortion, as sufficient enough to protect the life of the woman. Yet repeatedly, when applied in heart-wrenching situations, the results are much murkier.

“We have black and white laws on something that is almost always multiple shades of gray,” said Kaitlyn Kash, one of 20 Texas women denied abortion who are suing the state seeking clarification of the laws — one of a handful of similar lawsuits playing out across the country.

Advertisement

Article continues below this ad

Advertisement

State lawmakers there and elsewhere face growing pressure to answer these questions by amending laws in legislative sessions that start in most states next month. But it’s not certain how — or whether — they will.

Before the Supreme Court overturned the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision in June 2022, nearly every state allowed abortion at least until a fetus would be viable outside the womb — around 24 weeks’ gestational age, or about 22 weeks after conception.

Yet the new ruling cleared the way for states to impose tighter restrictions or bans; several had such laws already on the books in anticipation of the decision.

Currently, 14 states are enforcing bans on abortion throughout pregnancy. Two more have such bans on hold due to court rulings. And another two have bans that take effect when cardiac activity can be detected, about six weeks into pregnancy — often before women know they’re pregnant.

Each state ban has a provision that allows abortion under at least some circumstances to save the life of the mother. At least 11 — including three with the strictest bans — allow abortion because of fatal fetal anomalies, and some do when the pregnancy was the result of rape or incest.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Article continues below this ad

But a provision included in a law enacted by Congress in 1986 and signed by Republican President Ronald Reagan said abortion must be available when a pregnant woman’s life is at risk during a medical emergency.

But a lack of clarity over how to apply that rule and other exceptions in state laws has escalated the trauma and heartache some women experience while facing serious medical issues but unable to access abortion in their home states.

The case of Katie Cox, a Texas woman who sued for immediate access to abortion amid a fraught pregnancy and was denied by the state’s top court, received broad attention this month.

Advertisement

Meanwhile, Jaci Statton filed a complaint in Oklahoma claiming the state violated the federal rule. She said in court documents that because her own life wasn’t found to be in immediate peril when doctors deemed her pregnancy nonviable, she was told to wait in a hospital parking lot until her conditioned worsened enough to qualify for life-saving care.

In Tennessee, Nicole Blackmon told reporters that a 15-week ultrasound showed that several of her baby’s major organs were growing outside its stomach and it would likely not survive. Even so, her medical team told her she didn’t have the option to have an abortion. She eventually delivered a stillborn baby because she could not afford to travel out of state for an abortion.

Advertisement

Article continues below this ad

The vagueness surrounding the Volunteer State’s abortion ban has prompted Republican state Sen. Richard Briggs’ push to tweak the law during the upcoming 2024 legislative session. However, it’s unclear how far the measure will advance inside the GOP-controlled statehouse where many members are running for reelection.

Advertisement

Republicans carved out an extremely narrow exception earlier this year, but Briggs, who is a doctor, said the statute still fails to properly help women and doctors. He wants the law to include a list diagnoses when abortion could be appropriate and protect women with pregnancy complications who may end up infertile if they don’t receive an abortion.

Other states took steps in 2023 to address the confusion, but advocates say they didn’t fully accomplish the task.

In Texas, lawmakers this year added a provision that offers doctors some legal protection when they end pregnancies in cases of premature rupture of membranes, commonly referred to as water breaking, or ectopic pregnancies. which can lead to dangerous internal bleeding.

Across the country, advocates on both sides anticipate more legislatures will consider adding or clarifying abortion ban exceptions and definitions in 2024, though few, if any, such measures have been filed so far.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Article continues below this ad

“What is and is not an abortion, what is an abortion emergency?” said Denise Burke, senior counsel with Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative Christian legal advocacy group that his behind many anti-abortion lawsuits. “That may need some clarification in some areas.”

Meanwhile, in state where Democrats are in control, lawmakers are expected to push to loosen abortion restrictions and expand access.

This year, Maine became the seventh state to have no specific limit on when during pregnancy an abortion can be obtained.

Greer Donley, an associate professor at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law, who is an expert on abortion law, said there could be a push for more changes like that: “Many people are questioning whether a line should exist at all right now.”

Advertisement

The line is stark in Texas, where changes are unlikely in 2024 because lawmakers aren’t scheduled to meet.

Advertisement

Article continues below this ad

In Texas, Kash and 19 other women who were denied abortions, plus two physicians, have a lawsuit before the state’s Supreme Court seeking to clarify when abortions should be allowed.

Kash, who already had one child, was overjoyed at the thought of telling family and friends that she was expecting. But after a routine ultrasound 13 weeks into pregnancy, she learned that the baby had severe skeletal dysplasia – a condition affecting bone and cartilage growth. Her baby was unlikely to survive birth or likely to suffocate soon after being born.

Advertisement

“Is this where we talk about termination?” Kash asked her doctor.

“He told me to get a second opinion out of state,” she recalled.

Her health wasn’t immediately at risk of failing, so she didn’t qualify for any of the narrow exceptions to allow her doctor to provide her abortion services. Instead, she went to another state to terminate her pregnancy legally.

In the arguments on the case last month, a lawyer for the patients told the justices about the confusion.

“While there is technically a medical exception to the ban,” Molly Duane, a Center for Reproductive Rights lawyer said, “no one knows what it means and the state won’t tell us.”

Advertisement

Beth Klusmann, an assistant state attorney general, said that the law does include guidance: Doctors must use “reasonable medical judgment” when deciding whether a pregnant woman’s life is at risk.

She added that “there are always going to be harder calls at the edge” of the lines of any abortion ban.

Marc Hearron, a lawyer at the Center for Reproductive Rights who is leading the Texas case, said he does not have a lot of confidence in lawmakers across the U.S. to do it right generally.

“Legislatures do not have a track record of listening to doctors,” he said. “We’re certainly not waiting on legislatures to do the right thing.”



Source link

Advertisement

Austin, TX

Austin weather: Winter Storm Warning in the forecast for Central Texas

Published

on

Austin weather: Winter Storm Warning in the forecast for Central Texas


Much of Central Texas is bracing for bitter cold Monday and Tuesday after arctic air arrived Saturday.

Advertisement

Winter Weather Advisory

The Hill Country will be under a Winter Weather Advisory beginning at 6 p.m. Monday, Jan. 20 and lasting until 6 p.m. Tuesday, Jan. 21.

The Advisory impacts the following counties: Bandera, Blanco, Burnet, Frio, Gillespie, Kendall, Kerr, and Llano.

Advertisement

Mixed precipitation is expected, with snow and sleet accumulations up to an inch. We could also see ice accumulation up to a few hundredths of an inch.

Drivers should plan on slippery road conditions and people are advised to watch their first few steps on stairs, sidewalks and driveways, says the National Weather Service.

Advertisement

Winter Storm Warning

The rest of Central Texas, except for Milam and Lampasas counties, will be under a Winter Storm Warning, starting at 6 p.m. Monday, Jan. 20 until 6 p.m. Tuesday, Jan. 21.

Heavy mixed precipitation is expected with snow and sleet accumulations up to two inches and ice accumulations around a tenth of an inch.

Advertisement

Some regions, especially farther to the east, may see higher accumulations of ice. 

Roads will likely be slick and will make for dangerous driving conditions and impacts are expected during the morning commute. Refreezing is also expected on Tuesday evening according to the National Weather Service.

Cold Weather Advisory

Advertisement

All counties are under a Cold Weather Advisory until noon Wednesday, Jan. 22.

Lows on Monday night will be in the mid 20s with wind chills in the teens and single digits out west.

Tuesday night is colder, with low temps in the teens and wind chills again in the teens and single digits.

Advertisement

Wind chill values can lead to hypothermia with prolonged exposure, says the NWS, so Central Texans are advised to use caution when traveling outside and wear appropriate clothing, including a hat and gloves.

What to do

If you’re able to on Monday and Tuesday, stay indoors and minimize driving.

Advertisement

If not, travelers should drive carefully and slowly, giving plenty of space between them and other vehicles. Drivers can also check current road conditions on DriveTexas.org.

Austin weather: Tips to prepare your home for arctic blast

Central Texans are also advised to protect the four P’s: pets, plants, pipes and people and should also remember not to use generators or grills inside their homes.

Advertisement

Many Central Texas school districts have already chosen to cancel classes for Tuesday, Jan. 21. Many of them were set to be closed already on Monday, Jan 20, due to Martin Luther King Jr Day.

7-Day Forecast

We will begin warming up on Thursday, taking highs into the mid 50s with a steady rise all the way through next weekend.

Advertisement

Track your local forecast for the Austin area quickly with the free FOX 7 WAPP. The design gives you radar, hourly, and 7-day weather information just by scrolling. Our weather alerts will warn you early and help you stay safe during storms.

The Source: Information from FOX 7 Austin meteorologist Leslie London and the National Weather Service.

Advertisement
Winter WeatherSevere WeatherWeather ForecastAustin



Source link

Continue Reading

Austin, TX

Austinites Can Now Access 24/7 Emergency Restoration Services from Lightspeed Restoration

Published

on

Austinites Can Now Access 24/7 Emergency Restoration Services from Lightspeed Restoration


AUSTIN, Texas, Jan. 19, 2025 /PRNewswire/ — Lightspeed Restoration of Austin proudly announces its opening as a locally owned and operated business dedicated to providing the Austin community with fast, reliable, high-quality restoration services. Lightspeed Restoration specializes in water damage restoration , fire damage restoration, disaster recovery, and reconstruction, offering comprehensive solutions tailored to meet the unique needs of homeowners and businesses.

Logo

Jonathan and Samantha Friedman, the proud owners of Lightspeed Restoration of Austin, founded the business to combine their passion for helping others with a deep commitment to exceptional service. “As members of the Austin community, we’re thrilled to contribute to our neighbors’ well-being by providing critical restoration services when they’re needed most,” said the Friedmans. “We pride ourselves on accountability, honesty, and delivering results that exceed expectations.”

Equipped with state-of-the-art technology and staffed by a team of highly trained professionals, Lightspeed Restoration of Austin is available 24/7 to assist with emergencies of all sizes. The company understands that disasters can be life-changing and emotionally challenging. That’s why their approach focuses on restoring properties and providing compassionate support during difficult times. With a dedication to precision, safety, and efficiency, Lightspeed Restoration aims to ease the burden of recovery and help clients regain a sense of normalcy.

Why Choose Lightspeed Restoration of Austin?

Advertisement
  • Rapid Response: 24/7 availability to address urgent restoration needs.

  • Experienced Team: Skilled professionals focused on quality and safety.

  • Comprehensive Services: Expert solutions for water, fire, disaster recovery, and reconstruction.

  • Accountability and Honesty: A commitment to integrity in every project.

  • Community-Focused: Locally owned and deeply invested in Austin’s well-being.

For more information about Lightspeed Restoration of Austin or to request emergency services, call 512-428-8309 or visit https://lightspeedrestoration.com/austin-tx/ .

Media Contact: Phone: 512-428-8309 Email: lr.austin@lightspeedrestoration.com Website: https://lightspeedrestoration.com/austin-tx/ For press inquiries or more information about our services, please reach out to us anytime.

About Lightspeed Restoration

Lightspeed Restoration is a trusted leader in the restoration industry, offering comprehensive solutions for water damage, fire damage, disaster recovery, and reconstruction. Dedicated to rapid response, superior craftsmanship, and outstanding customer service, Lightspeed Restoration is committed to helping Austin homeowners and businesses recover and rebuild after disasters. To learn more, visit us at https://lightspeedrestoration.com/austin-tx/.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Austin, TX

From the Statesman archives: Newcomers did not control Indigenous Texas for centuries

Published

on

From the Statesman archives: Newcomers did not control Indigenous Texas for centuries


In this “From the Archives” series — subtitled in jest “20,000 Years of Austin History in 20 Minutes” — we’ve introduced the concept for the series, and devoted one column to the arrival of humans in the Austin area.

This, the third column, looks at the arrival of Europeans and Africans 500 years ago.

As previously noted, Spaniard Álvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca and an Arabic-speaking African named Esteban de Dorantes (Estevanico) were among 80 men shipwrecked on the Texas Gulf Coast. They were among the four survivors of those parties who spent the next years exploring the interior.

Cabeza de Vaca wrote about this initial incursion in his fascinating report, published as “La Relacion.” For their part, the Spanish claimed what is now Texas until Mexican independence in 1821.

Advertisement

Claiming, however, is not controlling.

When you look at a traditional map of North America during the 1600s, for instance, you see wide stretches of the northern and central regions as held by France.

Meanwhile, the English laid claim to much of the Eastern Seaboard; and the Dutch West India Company on the region around New Amsterdam, later renamed New York City, as well as land from Maryland to Connecticut and the Hudson Valley (at least from 1614 to 1664).

The Spanish planted their flags in Florida, Texas and the Southwest, especially the relatively populated area around Santa Fe, N.M.

Advertisement

By 1732, the Russian Empire had joined the imperial scramble, laying claim to the Pacific Coast territories of North America.

Yet as historian Pekka Hämäläinen argues in his magnificent book, “Indigenous Continent: The Epic Contest for North America,” the Europeans generally controlled only slivers of land around forts and settlements. Yes, they operated ports, mines, farms and trading posts, but it took hundreds of years to wrest the North America from the Native Americans.

Advertisement

Texas is a particular case in point.

While maps might have indicated that New Spain included much of what is now Texas, the Spanish, in fact, rarely controlled territory beyond a few scattered presidios, missions and villages. The exceptions might be found in the brushy South Texans land around San Antonio and La Bahía, where Tejanos operated productive ranches.

Similar things could be said about the French, who for a long while considered the entire Mississippi River watershed, which includes the Red River and Texas its tributaries, theirs. This claim sometimes included disputed territory as far south as Matagorda Bay.

These insubstantial claims did not improve much after the European powers departed. During the early 19th century, neither the Mexican central government, nor the American immigrants, who began arriving in numbers during the 1820s, controlled more than a few patches on the map.

Advertisement

It was not until the Red River War (1874-1875) that the United States — and its still relatively new state of Texas — controlled all of the state’s territory. That was after more than 50 years of almost constant conflict with Native Americans, who were either removed or nearly exterminated in the process.

What about Austin, you say? In 1730, the Spanish temporarily transplanted three East Texas missions to somewhere along the Colorado River in the Austin area. Those were moved to better fortified positions in San Antonio a few months later. Archeologists have unearthed no physical evidence of those incompletely documented missions.

Which means the Spanish presence in Texas, which lasted intermittently from the 1520s to the 1820s, made little direct impact on the area around Austin.

It was Indigenous land.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending