Judge orders New York OB-GYN to stop sending abortion pills to Texas, pay $100K fine
The ruling, obtained by the American-Statesman, is the first in a case challenging "shield laws" designed to prevent states with abortion bans, like Texas, from punishing doctors in other states that support the procedure, like New York.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in December sued Dr. Margaret Daley Carpenter, who is licensed in New York and co-founded the Abortion Coalition for Telemedicine Access in 2022, for allegedly prescribing and mailing mifepristone and misoprostol to a 20-year-old woman from Collin County, Paxton's home turf in North Texas. Both drugs are used to induce abortions and help clear miscarriages.
The original lawsuit noted that the biological father — who was not previously informed about the pregnancy, according to the complaint — took the woman to the hospital after she began to hemorrhage. After he learned she had terminated the pregnancy, he discovered the empty pill boxes at the woman's residence.
Carpenter has not yet appointed an attorney in the case or responded to the lawsuit, Collin County court records show. She did not appear at a court hearing Wednesday, according to the New York Times, which first reported on the Thursday ruling.
Because Carpenter "failed to file any answer or responsive pleading" to the lawsuit despite repeated notifications, the allegations in Texas' case against her were admitted as fact, the order states.
The ruling by Judge Bryan Gantt, whom Republican Gov. Greg Abbott appointed to the 471st District Court in September, is a default ruling that permanently enjoins Carpenter from "prescribing abortion-inducing drugs to Texas residents" and fines her $100,000 and around $13,000 in attorney's fees for violating Texas' near-total abortion ban. The fees will accrue at an interest rate of 7.5% each day until paid.
Gant wrote that "an unborn child died" as a result of the physician's actions.
New York's 2022 shield law bars public entities from cooperating with out-of-state investigations into reproductive health care services. It also protects against subpoenas and witness summonses, and prohibits the extradition of lawsuit defendants to other states.
Texas has banned abortions in almost all instances except when a pregnant person faces a "life-threatening condition," with no exceptions for rape, incest or fatal fetal anomalies.
Paxton's office did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the case. Carpenter did not respond to the Statesman's repeated attempts to reach her by phone Thursday.
Reproductive law scholar Mary Ziegler previously told the Statesman that she expects the lawsuit will eventually be moved to federal court and could end up in the U.S. Supreme Court. The University of California at Davis School of Law professor also noted that New York's shield law allows doctors to sue anyone who sues them for providing abortion-related telemedicine services.
This is a developing story. Check back for updates.
This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: Texas judge orders New York OB-GYN to stop sending abortion pills
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Legislature overrides governor's veto to enact controversial law: 'An awful turning point'
Legislature overrides governor's veto to enact controversial law: 'An awful turning point' The North Carolina legislature overrode the governor's veto in order to approve a bill that could slow future environmental regulations. What's happening? Having already passed through the State House and Senate this past spring, House Bill 402 was vetoed by Democratic Governor Josh Stein in June. Republican lawmakers found enough votes to override the veto in late July, making it law, along with another seven previously vetoed bills. Also known as the Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny — or REINS — Act, HB 402 aims to place additional restrictions on the passage of any new environmental regulation in the state. According to North Carolina Health News, the new law will require any environmental regulation "with a projected financial impact" of $1 million over five years to be approved by a two-thirds majority of the body making the rule. For anything over $10 million, it requires unanimous approval. And for any regulation projected to cost $20 million or more, it requires formal approval from the state's General Assembly. Why is this concerning? This law could make it virtually impossible for any kind of real, substantive regulation to be implemented, environmental advocates say. "Lawmakers who passed this bill did not have the best interests of North Carolinians at heart," said Mary Maclean Asbill, director of the state's Southern Environmental Law Center's office. "This new law marks an awful turning point for families and communities across North Carolina when elected officials in the state legislature ignore serious illnesses and deaths in favor of polluters' profits," she continued in a release, per NCHN. The outlet noted that House Speaker Destin Hall, a Republican, said, "What we had in the REINS Act was a situation where if you have a regulation that is extremely expensive, our position is that it's something that [the legislature] needs to take a look at." Meanwhile, environmental advocates say that viewing each new regulation through a strictly financial lens — rather than through a lens that weighs the cost against the potential benefits for public health and essential ecosystems — will make passage of new legislation practically unobtainable. What's being done in North Carolina? While this legislation's finalization is certainly a blow to many environmentalists and public health advocates, their hopes are not completely lost in North Carolina. A pair of bills, HB 569 and Senate Bill 666, could still have major impacts on the state's environmental regulations, according to NCHN. Do you worry about having toxic forever chemicals in your home? Majorly Sometimes Not really I don't know enough about them Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. HB 569 would require polluters to reimburse public water systems for clean-ups of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances. SB 666 would charge the Environmental Management Commission with setting regulatory limits on PFAS. It's unclear how either bill could be impacted by HB 402 becoming law, though, and the status of both bills remains uncertain at this stage. Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
US pediatric group breaks with CDC advice, recommends COVID vaccines for young children
The American Academy of Pediatrics released its vaccine recommendations on Aug. 19 in a break from federal guidance shaped by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. The AAP, in tandem with multiple other professional medical associations, previously decried a May announcement made by Kennedy Jr. that the COVID-19 vaccine would no longer be included in the Centers for Disease Control's recommended immunizations for healthy children and pregnant women, a move that went against previous expert guidance and bypassed the normal scientific review process. The AAP, a professional organization of over 65,000 board-certified pediatricians dedicated to advancing children's medicine, said in a June 26 statement that it would "continue to publish its own evidence-based recommendations and schedules," as the creation of federal immunization policy is 'no longer a credible process." Kennedy Jr. drew further ire from medical communities when he fired all 17 original members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, the committee of health experts that provides guidance on vaccine use to the CDC, replacing them with members that critics have called unqualified. Some of the members, like Kennedy Jr., have a history of anti-vaccine advocacy and involvement in anti-vaccine groups. Here's what to know about the new AAP guidance and how it differs from federal guidelines. What is the AAP guidance on COVID-19 vaccines for children? The AAP schedule lists which vaccines children should get at certain ages and provides updated guidance on influenza, RSV, and COVID-19 immunizations for children and adolescents from birth to age 18. The schedule recommends that all children between six months and 23 months receive the latest COVID-19 vaccine to reduce the chance of serious illness. Children and adolescents aged 2 to 18, without other high-risk factors like immunosuppression, can receive and should be offered the vaccine if they were not previously immunized, according to the guidance. Children, teens, and adults alike who are at increased risk of serious infection should receive the vaccine if they have not already, AAP said, adding that its recommendation differed from the CDC, which it said is now staffed with people who have a history of spreading vaccine misinformation. "The AAP will continue to provide recommendations for immunizations that are rooted in science and are in the best interest of the health of infants, children, and adolescents," AAP President Dr. Susan J. Kressly, MD, said in a statement. "Pediatricians know how important routine childhood immunizations are in keeping children, families and their communities healthy and thriving." What is the federal guidance on COVID-19 vaccines for children? The CDC did not go as far as completely removing COVID-19 vaccination from its immunization schedule despite Kennedy Jr.'s insistence. Instead, the agency changed its language from recommending the vaccine annually to suggesting parents consult with their child's physician on whether to vaccinate. Kennedy Jr. previously said that the CDC planned only to recommend the COVID vaccine for people over the age of 65 and those at high personal risk of infection, though the agency's website still contains information recommending it for everyone over the age of six months. A notice on the top webpages on the topic reads, "COVID-19 vaccine recommendations have recently been updated for some populations. This page will be updated to align with the updated immunization schedule," as of Aug. 19. This change to whom the vaccine is recommended could make it harder for others who want the COVID-19 vaccine to get it, experts warned. Since insurance coverage typically follows federal recommendations, anyone who wants the shot but isn't on the CDC's recommendation list may have to pay the price out of pocket HHS Communications Director Andrew Nixon defended the decision in a statement to USA TODAY, accusing the AAP, which receives funding from pharmaceutical companies like Pfizer, of failing to have proper conflict-of-interest safeguards in place. "By bypassing the CDC's advisory process and freelancing its own recommendations, while smearing those who demand accountability, the AAP is putting commercial interests ahead of public health and politics above America's children," Nixon said. Kennedy Jr. shared a separate response on social media on Aug. 19, pointing out that the agency's top donors are four companies that "make virtually every vaccine on the CDC recommended childhood vaccine schedule" and saying that the AAP recommendations are "corporate-friendly" and may "promote commercial ambitions of AAP's Big Pharma benefactors" instead of public health. "AAP should also be candid with doctors and hospitals that recommendations that diverge from the CDC's official list are not shielded from liability under the 1986 Vaccine Injury Act," his post concluded. USA TODAY reached out to AAP for comment on Aug. 19 but has not received a response. The new Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices didn't vote on COVID-19 vaccine recommendations when they met in June and are expected to reconvene in "September/October," according to the CDC. The FDA has signaled intentions to revoke the Pfizer COVID-19 shot for young, healthy children. In early August, HHS announced that it would pull $500M in funding from mRNA vaccine research and development. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Young kids should receive COVID vaccine despite CDC advice: AAP Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Innovative food company debuts new kind of milk that could redefine the dairy aisle: 'First of its kind'
Innovative food company debuts new kind of milk that could redefine the dairy aisle: 'First of its kind' We've seen soy milk, almond milk, oat milk, and the like — now, chia milk is taking the stage, setting a more eco-conscious precedent for milk alternatives to come. Benexia recently launched Seeds of Wellness Chia Milk, a sustainably produced plant-based milk made from ground-up whole chia seeds, according to Vegconomist Global. Chia is a strong source of healthy fats as well as dietary fiber: a "super-nutrient" lacking in most American diets, according to the American Society for Nutrition. Benexia's micro-milling process preserves the plant's original nutritive value while churning out a creamy milk-like texture. "We harness the nutritional power of chia to deliver wholesome products … with human and planet health in mind," said Benexia CEO Sandra Gilliot. The company follows regenerative agriculture techniques — using farming as a jumping-off point to promote soil health and ecosystem resilience — and relies exclusively on rainwater for irrigation, per its 2024 Sustainability Report. Chia, moreover, is a relatively drought-friendly plant, as indicated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture Plants Database. While chia plants require some moisture, they do not require regular watering, making them an agricultural staple as crop insecurity and extreme weather continue to rise in our overheating planet. Even after the chia growth and harvest, Benexia limits water usage in the ingredient processing phase of milk production, "using a nearly zero-waste, zero-water process from seed to packaging," PR Newswire reported. "Water is only introduced as the main ingredient in the final product." The mainstream introduction of Benexia's product could make chia milk a household staple. In 2022, the New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) valued the revenue from alternative milk sales in North America at 20% of the revenue from traditional milk, noting that 12% of U.S. households prefer alternative milk. "The [alternative milk] sector continues to expand," MFAT added, labeling taste, health, and sustainability as the primary causes of alternative milk's rising popularity. In 2023, the University of North Carolina's PIT Journal forecast a 127% increase in per capita alternative milk revenue between 2014 and 2027, based on the "impressive growth trajectory of the industry in the past and the future." What motivates you to wash your clothes in cold water? Saves money Saves energy Gentler on clothes I wash my clothes in hot water Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. Dairy milk production relies on heavy water consumption to sustain cows and also releases copious amounts of the planet-warming gas methane from cows' belches. Currently, almond milk is the most popular plant-based milk alternative, but even almond farming requires considerable water usage — more than 23 gallons of water for a single glass of almond milk, wrote Business Insider. If more and more households consume chia milk instead, the environmental repercussions could be huge. Conserving water puts less strain on estuaries and other bodies of water, allowing aquatic ecosystems to flourish while maintaining water security in our warming climate. Benexia's "first of its kind" product recently debuted on Costco shelves across the country. Its emergence will likely encourage other manufacturers to join in on chia milk production as well, popularizing chia as a sustainable and healthy milk alternative. Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet. Solve the daily Crossword
