August, 05 2023, 03:14pm EDT
Texas Judge Rules in Favor of Women Denied Abortions
Ruling blocks ban as it applies to people with severe pregnancy complications and fatal fetal diagnoses, though abortion remains banned in all other circumstances.
Today, a Texas District Judge issued an injunctionblocking Texas’ abortion bans as they apply to dangerous pregnancy complications, including fatal fetal diagnoses. After much confusion around what conditions qualify as “medical emergencies” under Texas’ abortion bans, today’s ruling gives clarity to doctors as to when they can provide abortions and allows them to use their own medical judgment. The Judge recognized that the women in the case should have been given abortions, and also dismissed the state’s request to throw out the case. Furthermore, today’s ruling found S.B. 8—a citizen-enforced abortion ban—unconstitutional.
In her ruling, Judge Jessica Mangrum wrote that doctors cannot be prosecuted for using their own “good faith judgement,” and that “The Court finds that physical medical conditions include, at a minimum: a physical medical condition or complication of pregnancy that poses a risk of infection, or otherwise makes continuing a pregnancy unsafe for the pregnant person; a physical medical condition that is exacerbated by pregnancy, cannot be effectively treated during pregnancy, or requires recurrent invasive intervention; and/or a fetal condition where the fetus is unlikely to survive the pregnancy and sustain life after birth.”
In Texas state court, a ruling is automatically stayed as soon as it is appealed, meaning today’s injunction will be temporarily blocked if and when the state appeals. Today’s ruling comes following a hearing in the case last month, where five of the plaintiffs gave gripping testimony and were callously cross examined by the state’s attorneys, who asked to have the case thrown out.
“Today’s ruling should prevent other Texans from suffering the unthinkable trauma our plaintiffs endured,” said Nancy Northup, President and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights. “It would be unconscionable for the State of Texas to appeal this ruling. The court has been clear: doctors must be able to provide patients the standard of care in pregnancy complications. That standard of care in certain cases is abortion because it is essential, life-saving healthcare. This decision is a win for Texans with pregnancy complications, however Texas is still denying the right to abortion care for the vast majority of those who seek it.”
“For the first time in a long time, I cried for joy when I heard the news,” said lead plaintiff Amanda Zurawski. “This is exactly why we did this. This is why we put ourselves through the pain and the trauma over and over again to share our experiences and the harms caused by these awful laws. I have a sense of relief, a sense of hope, and a weight has been lifted. Now people don’t have to be pregnant and scared in Texas anymore. We’re back to relying on doctors and not politicians to help us make the best medical decisions for our bodies and our lives.”
“This makes me hopeful that we can continue to provide competent rational care,” said plaintiff Dr. Damla Karsan. “It’s exactly what we needed. The court has guaranteed that we can once again provide the best care without fear of criminal or professional retribution. We can once again rely on our knowledge and training especially in challenging situations where abortions are necessary.”
The Center for Reproductive Rights brought this case—Zurawski v. State of Texas—on behalf of two OB-GYNs and 13 Texans who suffered severe pregnancy complications, yet were denied abortions due to the state’s abortion bans. The overarching Texas abortion ban will remain in place however, meaning most Texans will still be unable to access abortion in the state.
The conflicting language in Texas’ abortion bans has resulted in pervasive fear and confusion among doctors as to when they can help patients with severe pregnancy complications. Texas doctors have been turning patients away because they face up to 99 years in prison, at least $100,000 in fines, and the loss of their medical license for violating the abortion bans. This means pregnant Texans are being forced to either wait until they are near death to receive care or flee the state if they are able. In Zurawski v. State of Texas, the Center for Reproductive Rightsasked the court to give doctors clarity on what circumstances qualify as exceptions and to allow doctors to use their own medical judgment without fear of prosecution.
Learn more about the plaintiffs here.
The lawsuit was filed by the Center for Reproductive Rights, Morrison & Foerster LLP, and Kaplan Law Firm on behalf of patients Amanda Zurawski; Lauren Miller; Lauren Hall; Anna Zargarian; Ashley Brandt; Kylie Beaton; Jessica Bernardo; Samantha Casiano; Austin Dennard, D.O.; Taylor Edwards; Kiersten Hogan; Lauren Van Vleet; and Elizabeth Weller as well as healthcare providers Dr. Damla Karsan, M.D. and Dr. Judy Levison, M.D., M.P.H.
The Center for Reproductive Rights is a global human rights organization of lawyers and advocates who ensure reproductive rights are protected in law as fundamental human rights for the dignity, equality, health, and well-being of every person.
(917) 637-3600LATEST NEWS
Indigenous Brazilians Mobilize for Land Demarcation, Tribal Rights
Participants in the 20th Free Land Camp demanded that leftist Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva deliver on his promises to Indigenous people.
Apr 26, 2024
Thousands of people rallied this week in Brasília for the 20th annual Free Land Camp—the largest gathering of Indigenous people in Brazil—where participants demanded that President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva's administration safeguard their lands and cultural rights
Organized by the Association of Brazil's Indigenous Peoples (APIB), the five-day Free Land Camp—in Portuguese, Acampamento Terra Livre (ATL)—wrapped up Friday after a week of solidarity and action. Activities included rallies and marches; events commemorating slain Indigenous activists; and plenary sessions on the climate emergency, education, mental health, and more.
Some participants criticized Lula—who was notably absent from this year's ATL after attending the previous two camps—for what they said was his failure to fulfill campaign promises to Indigenous Brazilians—although attendees also acknowledged that his administration has taken major steps toward tackling illegal resource extraction and demarcating tribal lands.
Two big issues at this year's ATL—whose theme was "Our Existence is Ancestral: We Have Always Been Here!"—were the demarcation of Indigenous lands and opposition to proposed Amazon megaprojects, especially the plan to build the EF-170 railway through the heart of the imperiled rainforest in order to boost mining, logging, agribusiness, and other resource extraction and exploitation.
Last year, Brazilian lawmakers overruled Lula's partial veto of the highly contentious "Marco Temporal" law, which effectively paused demarcations and potentially opened more Indigenous lands to exploitation.
Demarcation confers legal protections against the illegal logging, mining, and ranching that have plagued rural Brazil for generations. On April 19—Indigenous Peoples Day in Brazil—Lula touted his government's demarcation of Aldeia Velha, land of the Pataxó people, in the northeastern state of Bahia, as well as the territory of the Karajá people in Cacique Fontoura, Mato Grosso.
Lula has acknowledged that his administration is falling short of its own demarcation pledges to Indigenous people and has promised to do more.
Alessandra Korap Munduruku, a member of the Munduruku people and a 2023 winner of the prestigious Goldman Environmental Prize, criticized the demarcation delay.
"Twenty years of resistance struggle by the Terra Livre camp. For 20 years we've been coming to Brasília, occupying and seeking our rights," she said. "This year, we're waiting for the government to demarcate all our lands. But the government is letting the [state] governors decide for us."
"This is not what we expect. It's not the governor's decision to make. It's the federal government's," Korap Munduruku added. "This is written in the Constitution, and we see that we are being used."
Brazilian and international agribusiness interests, including commodity traders like U.S.-based Cargill, are pushing Lula's administration to proceed with EF-170—commonly called the Ferrogrão—over the objections of Indigenous peoples. Kayapó leader Doto Takak-Ire warned last year that the Ferrogrão threatens the survival of no less than 48 native peoples, calling the project "the railway of Indigenous genocide."
Earlier this year, Brazilian Transport Minister Renan Filho said that building the Ferrogrão is a top administration priority, sparking widespread disappointment and anger among the Kayapó and other Indigenous people who say they'll be adversely affected by the railway.
ATL participants on Thursday led a "train of death" through Brasília's Esplanade of Ministries, a greenway bisecting numerous government buildings, to draw attention to the project's perils.
"Ferrogrão is the train of death, of deforestation," Korap Munduruku said Thursday.
"The railroad is not going to carry people, as they claim, but grain production of international companies that are financing this project," she continued. "It's a project that will affect not only Indigenous people, but also traditional communities and the people who live in the towns alongside its route."
"In addition, it is a project that will affect people all over the world because it would exacerbate climate change with the massive deforestation it would cause," Korap Munduruku added.
APIB executive coordinator Kleber Karipuna said the government did not adequately consult Indigenous peoples when planning the Ferrogrão.
"Hearings have only been held in cities, none in Indigenous villages," the Karipuna tribal leader said. "Once again, we demand that the protocols for consulting Indigenous peoples be respected. Additionally, the absence of a consultation protocol should not be used as an excuse to deny consultation of peoples affected by the project."
Takakpe Tapayuna Metuktire of the Raoni Institute, which promotes Indigenous rights and sustainability, warned that "Ferrogrão represents the death of kilometers and kilometers of forest."
"While we should be thinking about how to preserve what remains and think about alternative infrastructure projects that respect our rights, nature, and Indigenous and traditional peoples," Tapayuna Metuktire asserted. "We are fighting to prevent yet another project of death and destruction from prevailing in the Amazon. With Ferrogrão all that will be left is scorched earth."
Keep ReadingShow Less
UN Warns of 'Catastrophic' Imminent Escalation in Sudan
Warring factions in North Darfur state must "avoid locating military installations within or near densely populated areas, including towns and camps for internally displaced people," said one U.N. official.
Apr 26, 2024
The United Nations' top humanitarian affairs officials on Friday called for an immediate deescalation of hostilities in Sudan, where rival factions in the military government have been fighting for a year and where an attack on the city of El Fasher is reportedly imminent.
About 800,000 people in the city, the capital of North Darfur state, are in "extreme and immediate danger," U.N. aid operations director, Edem Wosornu, told the U.N. Security Council earlier this week, as she reported that clashes between the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), a paramilitary group, and the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) are nearing El Fasher.
Fighting between the two groups has intensified in recent weeks, forcibly displacing an estimated 40,000 people.
The U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs said Friday that the security situation in North Darfur has left more than a dozen aid trucks with relief supplies for 122,000 people stranded in neighboring Northern state, unable to proceed into the only capital city in Darfur that is not controlled by RSF.
"A patchwork of armed actors, including the Darfur Joint Protection Forces, the SAF, and the RSF control different parts of the El Fasher area," Human Rights Watch reported this week. "Tense calm alternating with episodic fighting has prevailed for months."
Since April 14, when RSF began to push into El Fasher, at least 43 people—including women and children—have been killed due to fighting between the SAF and RSF.
"Civilians are trapped in the city, afraid of being killed should they attempt to flee," said Seif Magango, spokesperson for the U.N. high commissioner for human rights, Volker Türk. "This dire situation is compounded by a severe shortage of essential supplies as deliveries of commercial goods and humanitarian aid have been heavily constrained by the fighting, and delivery trucks are unable to freely transit through RSF-controlled territory."
The lack of humanitarian aid in North Darfur has pushed the state toward a famine, with one child dying of starvation every two hours, according to a February report by Doctors Without Borders.
In December, the U.S. State Department announced an $85 million sale of radar and other military equipment to the United Arab Emirates (UAE), which The New York Times reported last year has been covertly supporting the RSF.
U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) proposed a joint resolution to block arms sales to the UAE in January, in light of its support for the paramilitary group.
Omar was among several lawmakers who wrote to President Joe Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken earlier this week, urging them to "deliver urgently-needed humanitarian assistance" and to help end the hostilities.
Sudanese-Australian writer Yassmin Abdel-Magied urged Americans on Friday to pressure lawmakers and the White House to take more action.
"There is a tiny window of opportunity for us to find a way to get the UAE... to make the RSF to stop in their tracks," said Abdel-Magied. "Maybe there's a way that we can avoid this massacre."
OCHA called on the warring parties to "take constant care to spare civilians and civilian objects in the conduct of military operations."
"They must, to the extent possible, avoid locating military installations within or near densely populated areas, including towns and camps for internally displaced people," said the office. "It is also imperative that the parties allow safe passage for civilians to leave El Fasher for safer areas."
Keep ReadingShow Less
With US Workers on the March, Southern States Take Aim at Unions
GOP leaders in the region are "truly astonished that workers might not trust their corporate overlords with their working conditions, pay, health, and retirement," said one critic.
Apr 26, 2024
Since six Southern Republican governors last week showed "how scared they are" of the United Auto Workers' U.S. organizing drive, Tennessee Volkswagen employees have voted to join the UAW while GOP policymakers across the region have ramped up attacks on unions.
The UAW launched "the largest organizing drive in modern American history" after securing improved contracts last year with a strike targeting the Big Three automakers—General Motors, Ford, and Stellantis. The ongoing campaign led to the "landslide" victory in Chattanooga last week, which union president Shawn Fain pointed to as proof that "you can't win in the South" isn't true.
The Tennessee win "is breaking the brains of Republicans in that region. They're truly astonished that workers might not trust their corporate overlords with their working conditions, pay, health, and retirement," Thom Hartmann wrote in a Friday opinion piece.
"The problem for Republicans is that unions represent a form of democracy in the workplace, and the GOP hates democracy as a matter of principle."
"The problem for Republicans is that unions represent a form of democracy in the workplace, and the GOP hates democracy as a matter of principle," he argued. "Republicans appear committed to politically dying on a number of hills that time has passed by. Their commitment to gutting voting rolls and restricting voting rights, their obsession with women’s reproductive abilities, and their hatred of regulations and democracy in the workplace are increasingly seen by average American voters as out-of-touch and out-of-date."
Just before voting began in Chattanooga, GOP Govs. Kay Ivey of Alabama, Brian Kemp of Georgia, Tate Reeves of Mississippi, Henry McMaster of South Carolina, Bill Lee of Tennessee, and Greg Abbott of Texas claimed that "unionization would certainly put our states' jobs in jeopardy" and the UAW is "making big promises to our constituents that they can't deliver on."
The next nationally watched UAW vote is scheduled for May 13-17 at a Mercedes-Benz plant in Vance, Alabama.
"Workers at our plant are ready for this moment," Mercedes employee Jeremy Kimbrell said last week. "We are ready to vote yes because we are ready to win our fair share. We are going to end the Alabama discount and replace it with what our state actually needs. Workers sticking together and sticking by our community."
As workers gear up for the election, the Alabama House of Representatives on Tuesday voted 72-30 for a bill that would withhold future economic incentive money from companies that voluntarily recognize unions rather than holding secret ballots. The state Senate previously passed a version of the legislation but now must consider it with the lower chamber's amendments.
The Associated Pressnoted that "Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp signed similar legislation on Monday" and that Tennessee already has one on the books.
With his signature on Senate Bill 362, "Kemp's aim is to thwart future organizing attempts by workers at automotive plants in Georgia, such as those operated by Hyundai Motor Group," according toThe Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
As the newspaper detailed:
Georgia has been a right-to-work state since 1947, when Congress passed the Taft-Hartley Act, allowing workers to refuse to join a union or pay dues, even though they may benefit from contracts negotiated by a union with their employer. Just 5.4% of workers in the state belonged to a union in 2023, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
But the National Labor Relations Act of 1935, also known as the Wagner Act, protects the right for workers to form a union and collectively bargain for better wages and working conditions.
The new Georgia law is expected to be challenged in court, labor experts have said.
Acting U.S. Labor Secretary Julie Su told the AP on Thursday that she is not sure if the department will challenge the laws, given the National Labor Relations Board's responsibilities, but she stressed that "there are federal standards beneath which no worker should have to live and work."
In terms of joining a union, "that choice belongs to the worker, free from intervention, either by the employer or by politicians, free from retaliation and threats," Su said. "And what we are seeing is that workers who were thought to be too vulnerable to assert that right are doing it, and they're doing it here in the South."
The U.S. labor chief also slammed "unacceptable" union-busting efforts by companies and suggested that protecting the right to unionize is part of President Joe Biden's "promise to center workers in the economy."
"He has said he's the most pro-worker, pro-union president in history, and we are going to make good on that promise. And that includes making sure that workers have the right to join a union," Su said of the president.
Biden's commitment to workers and unionizing rights has caught the attention of GOP leaders. The governors' joint statement nodded to the UAW's January endorsement of the president, who is seeking reelection in November, and South Carolina's leader attacked the administration earlier this year.
During his January State of the State speech, McMaster declared that "we will not let our state's economy suffer or become collateral damage as labor unions seek to consume new jobs and conscript new dues-paying members. And we will not allow the Biden administration's pro-union policies to chip away at South Carolina's sovereign interests. We will fight. All the way to the gates of hell. And we will win."
News From the Statesreported Friday that "of all the foreign-owned automakers in South Carolina, BMW would be the most likely mark in the near term if enough of its workers show interest. The massive plant near Greer—the manufacturer's only U.S. production facility—employs some 11,000 people, twice the number of workers at Volkswagen in Tennessee and Mercedes in Alabama. It has operated in the Upstate for nearly 30 years and is in the process of adding electric vehicle lines."
However, a UAW spokesperson told the outlet that they don't yet have the numbers for the BMW and Volvo facilities in the state, and Marick Masters, a Wayne State University professor who studies the union, said: "I don't think they're writing anybody off but they know the history of unionization. And I would say South Carolina is a very inhospitable place for unions."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular