“People’s Lawsuit” Challenges Texas Abortion Restrictions

Ambitious effort to reverse anti-choice laws gets a day in court

Imagine if nearly all of Texas' onerous and most restrictive abortion laws over the past two decades were struck down in one fell swoop. That's what abortion providers and funding groups are hoping to achieve with their latest suit, Whole Woman's Health Alliance v. Paxton, a sweeping challenge to dozens of the state's anti-choice laws.

Dubbed the "People's Lawsuit" by abortion rights advocates, the ambitious action filed in June argues that those burdensome laws, including the 24-hour pre-procedure sonogram and a rule that forces doctors to provide state-mandated misinformation about abortion, can now be undone in light of the 2016 Supreme Court Hellerstedt decision ("Groups File Expansive Suit to Challenge Dozens of Abortion Restrictions," June 14, 2018) that overturned Texas' House Bill 2.

But state officials are working to make sure that the People's Lawsuit never sees the legal light of day. In federal court in Austin Monday, Jan. 7, providers including Whole Woman's Health Alliance, the Afiya Center, Fund Texas Choice, and the Lilith Fund, represented by the Austin attorney Patrick O'Connell and the Lawyering Project's Steph­a­nie Toti – who brought you the SCOTUS victory in Hellerstedt – argued against the state's motion to dismiss the lawsuit in an hourlong hearing before U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel.

Beth Klusmann, assistant solicitor general in the Texas Attorney General's Office, accused the plaintiffs of attempting to upend the "entire state regulatory system" with "meritless claims." Klusmann said it was "absurd" to argue that the slew of abortion rules in question pose an undue burden on women, and accused abortion funders – nonprofit assistance groups that help largely low-income women obtain care, often on a volunteer basis – of being motivated by financial interests rather than their clients' best interests. They "want their dollar to stretch further," said Klusmann of the plaintiffs.

Meanwhile, Toti argued for the plaintiffs that the string of restrictive laws has caused abortion in Texas to be less affordable, more stigmatized, and further out of reach logistically, especially for low-income women and people of color. The Hellerstedt ruling helped invalidate the grounds upon which several of Texas' prior laws were upheld by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, making them now ripe for scrutiny. "Once upon a time, Texas had a reasonable regime to regulate abortion, but over time the state incrementally added more laws that became burdensome and unwieldy, making it incredibly difficult for patients and providers to navigate," said Toti.

Before a packed courtroom, Yeakel, who often finds himself the arbiter in the state's abortion wars, told both sides that their pleadings were a bit convoluted, although the oral arguments helped clear some of that confusion. Yeakel didn't indicate when he'd rule on the motion, but said another option might be for the parties to re-plead the case so they could lay out the issues more clearly.

"We are proud to lead another legal challenge in Texas," said Whole Woman's Health CEO Amy Hagstrom Miller, decrying the state's motion as "an evasive maneuver. ... Tex­ans deserve better. Abortion care is health care, and we're ready to make our case and get back to what we do best – providing dignified and compassionate health care."

Got something to say on the subject? Send a letter to the editor.

Read more of the Chronicle's decades of reproductive rights reporting here.

A note to readers: Bold and uncensored, The Austin Chronicle has been Austin’s independent news source for over 40 years, expressing the community’s political and environmental concerns and supporting its active cultural scene. Now more than ever, we need your support to continue supplying Austin with independent, free press. If real news is important to you, please consider making a donation of $5, $10 or whatever you can afford, to help keep our journalism on stands.

Support the Chronicle  

More reproductive rights
With Rosie's Law, Austin Legislators Aim to Restore Abortion Coverage
With Rosie's Law, Austin Legislators Aim to Restore Abortion Coverage
Sheryl Cole, Sarah Eckhardt introduce bicameral legislation that would expand health insurance coverage for abortion care

Mary Tuma, Jan. 29, 2021

5th Circuit Strikes Down Texas Anti-Choice Law
5th Circuit Strikes Down Texas Anti-Choice Law
Judges say law would have forced women into "painful, invasive, and experimental" procedures

Mary Tuma, Oct. 23, 2020

More by Mary Tuma
Abortion Care Providers “Heartened” After SB 8 Hearing at SCOTUS
Abortion Care Providers “Heartened” After SB 8 Hearing at SCOTUS
Oral arguments focus on law’s vigilante enforcement

Nov. 5, 2021

Abortion Care Providers “Heartened” After SB 8 Hearing at SCOTUS
Abortion Care Providers “Heartened” After SB 8 Hearing at SCOTUS
Oral arguments focus on law’s vigilante enforcement

Nov. 1, 2021


abortion rights, reproductive rights, Whole Woman's Health v. Paxton, People's Lawsuit, Whole Woman's Health, Amy Hagstrom Miller, HB 2, SB 5, sonogram, waiting period, Lee Yeakel, Stephanie Toti, Lawyering Project, Patrick O'Connell, Lilith Fund, Afiya Center, Fund Texas Choice, Beth Klusmann

One click gets you all the newsletters listed below

Breaking news, arts coverage, and daily events

Keep up with happenings around town

Kevin Curtin's bimonthly cannabis musings

Austin's queerest news and events

Eric Goodman's Austin FC column, other soccer news

Information is power. Support the free press, so we can support Austin.   Support the Chronicle