After reported deaths, Texas lawmakers file bills to clear confusion over medical exceptions to state's near abortion ban
Texas lawmakers are hoping new bills will clear up the confusion over medical exceptions to the state's near abortion ban. The legislation comes after critics blamed uncertainty over the law for putting women's health in jeopardy and in some cases, leading to death. Republican and Democratic lawmakers have filed legislation in the Texas Senate and House. Under Texas law, the only
exception
to the state's
near abortion ban
is to save the life of the mother.
At a news conference last week at the Texas Capitol, dozens of religious leaders praised the bills. While lawmakers are not creating new exceptions, they say are making the existing ones clearer, so that women, their doctors, and hospitals are all on the same page.
State
Senator Bryan Hughes
, R-Mineola filed Senate Bill 31. He told CBS News Texas this would ensure that doctors who practice obstetrics and gynecology must take a course to know what the law is, and the course must also be available to hospital lawyers as well.
"Our goal is to make the statutes crystal clear," said Hughes. "So there is no excuse, no delay in treating moms that need help and making sure that docs know what the law is."
State Representative Charlie Geren, R-Fort Worth, introduced House Bill 44. At the news conference at the Capitol he said, "It's an honor to carry the Life of the Mother bill. There are too many women who've suffered, too many have died. If one has died, it's too many and more have."
Rev. Danielle Ayres of the Friendship West Baptist Church in Dallas said, "For us, pregnancy and motherhood are sacred. So, because of that, the past four years we have been more engaged with dealing with black maternal mortality rates because black women are three times more likely to die from pregnancy related issues. So we do believe and we support the Life of the Mother Act."
If doctors are found guilty of
performing an abortion
when they shouldn't have, they could still face criminal charges, civil lawsuits, fines, and losing their licenses.
Watch Eye On Politics 7:30 a.m. Sunday on air and streaming on CBS News Texas.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
8 minutes ago
- Politico
Trump asks Supreme Court to green light Education Department firings
The Trump administration asked the Supreme Court to give the go-ahead to carry out a plan to fire almost 40 percent of the Education Department's workforce. In an emergency appeal filed Friday morning, Solicitor General John Sauer asked the high court to lift a preliminary injunction a federal judge in Boston issued last month after determining that such sweeping staffing cuts would cripple the agency's ability to carry out functions assigned to it by Congress. While Trump has vowed to eliminate the Education Department, Sauer insisted that the proposed, wide-ranging reductions in force target 'inefficiency' and are not an attempt to kneecap the agency as the president advocates for its demise. Sauer said Boston-based U.S. District Judge Myong Joun's order was part of a pattern of federal judges overstepping their proper role and second-guessing executive branch decisions. The Constitution 'does not empower district courts to presume that all 1,400 employees must be reinstated to their previous jobs and functions based on anecdotal speculation about impairment of some of the Department's services,' Sauer wrote, adding: 'The Department remains committed to implementing its statutorily mandated functions.' Joun issued the injunction May 22 in connection with lawsuits brought by Democratic-led states, the Somerville, Massachusetts, public school system and several labor unions. Noting that Trump has repeatedly vowed to shutter the Education Department 'immediately,' the Biden appointee concluded that the layoffs amounted to 'an attempt … to shut down the Department without Congressional approval.' The 1st Circuit Court of Appeals refused to block Joun's order, although the administration's appeal remains pending. In April, the Supreme Court stepped in at the administration's request to block an order Joun issued in a separate lawsuit involving the Education Department. That directive required the agency to keep funding certain teaching-related grants that Trump appointees had sought to terminate. Four of the high court's nine justices dissented from the stay blocking Joun's order in that case. In an emergency appeal already pending at the Supreme Court, the Trump administration is trying to lift a block a federal judge in San Francisco issued on tens of thousands of layoffs at all major federal agencies except for the Education Department.
The Hill
8 minutes ago
- The Hill
Jeffries declines to embrace Musk amid the billionaire's feud with Trump
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) is keeping his distance from Elon Musk even after the billionaire's extraordinary public rebuke of President Trump and the GOP's domestic agenda. Asked Friday if Musk's bitter break from Trump presents Democrats with an opportunity to form a strange-bedfellows alliance with the tech titan, Jeffries shifted the conversation immediately to the Democrats' efforts to kill Trump's 'big, beautiful bill.' 'The opportunity that exists right now is to kill the GOP tax scam,' Jeffries told reporters in the Capitol. 'It's legislation that we have been strongly opposed to, and uniformly opposed to, from the very beginning. … It rips health care away from millions of people. It snatches food out of the mouths of hungry children. And it rewards billionaires and [GOP] donors in ways that are fiscally irresponsible.' Pressed on whether Musk should be 'welcomed back' to the Democratic Party after the high-profile split from Trump, Jeffries punted again. 'Same answer,' he said. Jeffries cautious remarks demonstrate the limits of the old adage that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. They also highlight the potential difficulties Democrats would face if they embraced a polarizing and nationally unpopular figure in Musk — one they've spent most of the last year bashing for heavy spending on Trump's campaign and, more recently, for his role in heading Trump's efforts to gut the federal government. Still, some Democrats say Musk's influence is significant enough that Democrats should make the effort to try to court him to their side amid the Trump feud. Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), who represents parts of Silicon Valley, is leading the charge. 'If Biden had a big supporter criticize him, Trump would have hugged him the next day,' Khanna posted Thursday on X, which is owned by Musk. 'When we refused to meet with @RobertKennedyJr, Trump embraced him & won. We can be the party of sanctimonious lectures, or the party of FDR that knows how to win & build a progressive majority.' Jeffries isn't going nearly so far. But he has welcomed Musk's attacks on Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' and the Republicans who voted for it. And he aligned Democrats with Musk's sentiments that the package piles too much money onto the federal debt, a figure the Congressional Budget Office estimated to be $2.4 trillion. 'To the extent that Elon Musk has made the same point that everyone who has voted for this bill up until this moment should be ashamed of themselves, we agree,' Jeffries said. 'And to the extent that Elon Musk has made the point that the bill is a 'disgusting abomination,' we agree. And to the extent that Elon Musk has made the observation about the GOP tax scam — that it is reckless and irresponsible to explode the deficit by more than $3 trillion, and that potentially could set our country on a path toward bankruptcy — we agree.' 'These are arguments that Democrats have been making now for months.'
Associated Press
8 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Transgender troops face a deadline and a difficult decision: Stay or go?
WASHINGTON (AP) — As transgender service members face a deadline to leave the U.S. military, hundreds are taking the financial bonus to depart voluntarily. But others say they will stay and fight. For many, it is a wrenching decision to end a career they love, and leave units they have led or worked with for years. And they are angry they are being forced out by the Trump administration's renewed ban on transgender troops. Active duty service members had until Friday to identify themselves and begin to leave the military voluntarily, while the National Guard and Reserve have until July 7. Then the military will begin involuntary separations. Friday's deadline comes during Pride Month and as the Trump administration targets diversity, equity and inclusion efforts, saying it's aiming to scrub the military of 'wokeness' and reestablishing a 'warrior ethos.' 'They're tired of the rollercoaster. They just want to go,' said one transgender service member, who plans to retire. 'It's exhausting.' For others, it's a call to arms. 'I'm choosing to stay in and fight,' a noncommissioned officer in the Air Force said. 'My service is based on merit, and I've earned that merit.' The troops, who mainly spoke on condition of anonymity because they fear reprisals, said being forced to decide is frustrating. They say it's a personal choice based on individual and family situations, including whether they would get an infusion of cash or possibly wind up owing the government money. 'I'm very disappointed,' a transgender Marine said. 'I've outperformed, I have a spotless record. I'm at the top of every fitness report. I'm being pushed out while I know others are barely scraping by.' Some transgender troops decide to leave based on finances Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has said this is President Donald Trump's directive and what America voted for. The Pentagon, he said, is 'leaving wokeness & weakness behind' and that includes 'no more dudes in dresses.' Sen. Tammy Duckworth of Illinois, a veteran, and 22 other Democratic senators have written to Hegseth urging him to allow transgender troops to keep serving honorably. Already, more than 1,000 service members have voluntarily identified themselves as transgender and are slated to begin leaving, according to rough Defense Department estimates. Defense officials say there are about 4,240 active duty transgender troops but acknowledge the numbers are fuzzy. For many, the decision is financial. Those who voluntarily leave will get double the amount of separation pay they would normally receive and won't have to return bonuses or tuition costs. Those who refuse to go could be forced to repay reenlistment or other bonuses as high as $50,000. That was the tipping point for Roni Ferrell, an Army specialist at Joint Base Lewis-McChord near Tacoma, Washington. Ferrell, 28, lives on base with her wife and two children and had planned to stay in the Army for at least another decade. But she said she felt 'backed into a corner' to sign the voluntary separation agreement, fearing she would have to repay an $18,500 reenlistment bonus. 'My commander basically said it was my only option in order to make sure my kids are taken care of,' Ferrell said. The Marine, who has served for more than 25 years, said she had planned to stay and fight, but changed her mind. Lawyers, she said, told her an involuntary separation would put a code in her record saying she was forced to leave 'in the interests of national security.' That designation, she said, could mean those involuntarily separated could lose their security clearances, hurting future job prospects. In a statement Friday, a defense official said the code 'is not intended' to trigger clearance revocations and that gender dysphoria is not a security reporting requirement, according to the director of national intelligence. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. Cynthia Cheng-Wun Weaver, senior director of litigation for Human Rights Campaign, said it's important for troops to talk with judge advocates general in their services to ensure they understand the different procedures being implemented. Other transgender troops plan to stay despite the ban The Air Force service member and a transgender officer in the Army National Guard both said they plan to stay and fight. Lawsuits over the ban continue and could change or block the policy. For troops involved in the court battles as plaintiffs, leaving voluntarily now would likely hurt their standing in the case. For others, it's simply dedication to their career. 'I've really embraced military culture, and it's embraced me,' the Air Force member said. 'It's not about money. It's the career that I love.' The Guard soldier echoed that sentiment, saying he will stay on 'because it is important to me to serve. Frankly, I'm good at it, I'm well trained so I want to continue.' Others without bonuses to repay or who have been in the military only a short while and won't get much in separation bonus pay may opt to stay and see what happens. National Guard troops face a particular problem National Guard members who are heading to their monthly drill weekend or annual two-week drill in June could be required to go but serve as the gender they were assigned at birth. That means they would have to wear uniforms and haircuts of that gender, use that bathroom and be referred to as 'sir' or 'ma'am' based on that gender. For many, that could be close to impossible and create uncomfortable situations. 'If I were to show up to drill this weekend, I'd be expected to use all female facilities, I would be expected to wear a woman's uniform,' said the Army Guard officer, who transitioned to male about five years ago and says others in his unit know him as a man. 'I don't look like a woman. I don't feel like a woman. It would be disruptive to good order and discipline for me to show up and to tell my soldiers, you have to call me 'ma'am' now.' It's not clear if Guard units are handling it all the same way, and it could be up to individual states or commanders. Some may allow troops to postpone the drill or go on administrative leave. What happens next for transgender troops? The service members interviewed by The Associated Press said they don't know what will happen once the deadline passes to leave voluntarily. Some believe that unit commanders will quickly single people out and start involuntary separations. Others say the process is vague, may involve medical review boards and could take months. The defense official said Friday that as the Pentagon takes these steps, it 'will treat our service members with dignity and respect.' Under Hegseth's directive, military commanders will be told to identify troops with gender dysphoria — when a person's biological sex does not match their gender identity — and send them to get medical checks to force them out of the service, defense officials have said. The order relies on routine annual health checks — so it could be months before that evaluation is scheduled. 'My real big sticking point is that this administration's whole push is to reform this country based around merit, and that gender, race, etc., should have no factor in hiring,' the Air Force service member said. 'If that's true, I'm solely being removed for my gender, and merit is no longer a factor.' ___ Associated Press writer R.J. Rico in Atlanta contributed to this report.
