A Texas state court threw out a lawsuit against a doctor who violated the state law prohibiting abortions after six weeks on Thursday.
Dr. Alan Braid, who admitted to intentionally violating the law, was sued under Senate Bill 8, a law that allows private citizens to bring forth a civil lawsuit against someone who “aids or abets” in a prohibited abortion.
The lawsuit against Braid was the first legal test of the law’s constitutionality. The state court ruled from the bench on Thursday that the citizens did not have standing to sue if they were not directly affected by the abortion services provided, according to the Center for Reproductive Rights, the group representing Braid.
“Texas’s abortion ban remains in effect, but this ruling sets a precedent for other courts when considering whether bounty-hunting laws violate state constitutions,” the center tweeted.
#BREAKING: A Texas court has thrown out a lawsuit against Dr. Alan Braid.
Texas’s abortion ban remains in effect, but this ruling sets a precedent for other courts when considering whether bounty-hunting laws violate states’ constitutions.
— Center for Reproductive Rights (@ReproRights) December 8, 2022
Texas law bans abortions after six weeks, before most women realize that they are pregnant, and does not make exceptions for cases of rape and incest. The Senate Bill 8 provision, which went into effect on Sept. 1, is enforced by private citizens, not the state, allowing them to sue for a minimum of $10,000.
According to court documents, three “complete strangers” filed suit against Braid 14 days after he had admitted to performing an abortion in a Washington Post column.
Braid wrote in a column for the Washington Post that he had “fully understood” the legal consequences when he performed an abortion, but he wanted to make sure that the state did not “get away with its bid to prevent this blatantly unconstitutional law from being tested.”
The three strangers filed on two separate days, with two filing on Sept. 20 and one on Sept. 23, seeking relief reparations.
However, if a defendant demonstrates that they previously paid the full statutory damages brought against them for violating the state abortion law, then relief may not be awarded by the court under Senate Bill 8.
Braid argued that he had already paid the $10,000 to the state, so the three strangers did not have a claim to the money.
Thursday’s ruling is not limiting the private citizens’ law itself but does affect similar cases in the future.
“This is a significant win against S.B. 8’s bounty-hunting scheme because the court rejected the notion that Texas can allow a person with no connection to an abortion to sue,” Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, said in a statement.
Braid wrote in a column for the Washington Post that he had “fully understood” the legal consequences when he performed an abortion but that he wanted to make sure that the state did not “get away with its bid to prevent this blatantly unconstitutional law from being tested.”
“When I provided my patient with the care she needed last year, I was doing my duty as a physician,” Braid said in a statement following the ruling. “It is heartbreaking that Texans still can’t get essential health care in their home state and that providers are left afraid to do their jobs.”
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
He added that though he had to close his Texas and Oklahoma clinics, he plans to continue serving patients at new clinics in Illinois and New Mexico.
“I acted because I had a duty of care to this patient, as I do for all patients, and because she has a fundamental right to receive this care,” Braid said.
