States have set their own abortion laws since the Supreme Court, in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, overturned Roe v. Wade in the summer of 2022.
Now Paxton’s lawsuit, the first to text legal protections when it comes to states with conflicting abortion laws, will force the courts to decide if one state’s laws are more important than another state’s laws.
The court filing shows that Paxton accuses Dr. Margaret Carpenter, of New York, of mailing abortion drugs to a 20-year-old Texas woman in Collin County, just north of Dallas.
The woman took the abortion pills when she was nine months pregnant and began experiencing severe bleeding.
The filing does not note whether the woman successfully terminated her pregnancy, or if she experienced any long-term medical complications from taking mifepristone and misoprostol, according to Fox News.
New York’s law allows Carpenter to refuse to comply with court orders from Texas.
Pro-abortion states since the Dobbs decision have responded in two ways, Pavone, the founder of Priests for Life, said on American Family Radio Monday.
There’s a battle of ideologies going on, he told show host Jenna Ellis.
“Pro-abortion states do two things. They say, ‘we're going to protect the right to choose abortion for women everywhere, and our doctors are going to make sure that whether it's sending abortion pills or any other way they can do it, they are going to continue to service these women,’” Pavone said
Along the way the states are committed to shielding doctors from prosecution by pro-life states.
“The other thing they do is say to abortionists in states where there are limits, ‘hey guys come on in, come on into our state. You can kill babies here.’”
Paxton’s lawsuit will set in motion major conflicts that will shake America to its core, forcing politicians and leaders to reconsider a national abortion policy, Pavone said.
That’s something Donald Trump rejected throughout his campaign, saying he supported the justices' decision to allow states to regulate abortion.
Will a national ban be revisited?
Now the Texas AG, once mentioned as a possible Trump appointee to U.S. attorney general, has filed a lawsuit that asks the question, “Does it make sense to protect the fundamental right to life in one state but not in another?” Pavone said.
The answer to that is no, it does not make sense, Pavone said.
“Ultimately, we have to protect (life) from coast to coast. In fact, we have to protect it across the globe because it’s life itself. No right is more fundamental. That actually is the big picture we see unfolding before our eyes,” Pavone said.
The willingness of pro-abortion states to trample the decisions of pro-life states illustrates what Pavone calls a “battle of absolutes.”
There may be temporary plateaus in the abortion discussion, and pro-life advocates should take heart in victories like the Dobbs decision, Pavone says.
But neither side will be satisfied with partial victories.
“For the pro-abortion side it’s not enough to have the states decide to allow unlimited abortion like several states do, and for our side it’s not enough to limit abortion and certainly even to prohibit it in certain places. So, this is a clash of absolutes,” Pavone said.
For the pro-life side, the key in the clash will be clearly communicating the point that no right is more basic, more fundamental than the right to life.
It will have to communicate where life begins and the physical development of that life inside the womb to combat pro-abortion efforts to take that life with no restrictions before the moment of birth.
“We in the conservative, pro-family, pro-life movement are going to have to frame it that way simply because I think the issue itself is going to drive us into that position. You can go only so far in in trying to delineate what is or isn't permitted vis-a-vis abortion from state to state,” Pavone said.
The right to life is articulated in both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, Pavone said.
Carpenter is also the founder of the Abortion Coalition for Telemedicine, which states it is the only nationwide advocacy organization working to proactively advance telemedicine abortion in all 50 states.
The group provides clinicians with direct legal and technical support as it aims to “close the abortion accessibility gap for all patients – regardless of their zip codes,” its website says.
The group was founded in 2022 just after the Supreme Court decision.
Carpenter caused serious harm, Paxton says
The lawsuit was filed in Collin County where Paxton urged the court to hold Carpenter accountable to Texas law. Carpenter is not licensed in Texas and is not authorized to practice telemedicine in the state, the lawsuit says.
Paxton asked for civil penalties of last least $100,000 for each violation.
“In this case, an out-of-state doctor violated the law and caused serious harm to this patient. This doctor prescribed abortion-inducing drugs—unauthorized, over telemedicine—causing her patient to end up in the hospital with serious complications. In Texas, we treasure the health and lives of mothers and babies, and this is why out-of-state doctors may not illegally and dangerously prescribe abortion-inducing drugs to Texas residents,” Paxton said in a statement.
