Was the Texas Supreme Court Justified in Denying Kate Cox an Abortion?

Voices across the spectrum are reflecting on the case of a Texas woman who made national headlines this week after unsuccessfully seeking a medical exemption to Texas’ abortion ban.

For Context: Kate Cox is 20 weeks pregnant with a fetus diagnosed with a genetic defect that will almost certainly not make it to term and holds a high likelihood of damaging Cox’s future fertility. Cox was denied a medical exemption to the ban by the state Supreme Court. On Monday, it was announced that Cox was traveling out of state to have an abortion.

“Obviously Correct”: The National Review Editorial Board (Right bias) determined the court was “obviously correct in its reading of Texas law.” The board accuses left-rated media of “falsely claiming that Cox had been denied a life-saving abortion.” The article concludes, “Texas allows abortion when a doctor reasonably judges it necessary to address a mother’s life-threatening physical condition. That’s what the law says, and what the state’s supreme court just affirmed.”

“Hell and Back”: A writer in MSNBC (Left bias) argued that Cox was targeted by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton “not despite her condition but precisely because her pregnancy poses serious danger … Her experience belies practically every so-called pro-life claim ever made about abortion bans and their effects.” The writer concludes, “If Paxton will hound a woman like Cox to hell and back, what might he do to someone with fewer resources? If you’re afraid of the answer to that question, well, you’re supposed to be.”