From Cape You News in Austin,
you're watching Texas this
week with Ashley Goodo.
Good Sunday morning. For years,
the office of the Texas Attorney General
has prided itself on defending the unboard,
and Texas lawmakers have backed that up,
putting in statute that unborn
children are people.
But in a new lawsuit against the state,
the A G's office is now arguing a
fetus doesn't clearly have rights.
More on that in just a minute.
But first,
let's get to the three things you
need to know in Texas politics.
Governor
Greg Abbott ceremoniously signed a
slate of property tax bills Wednesday
aimed at saving homeowners hundreds of
dollars on their property tax bills.
Lawmakers in the House and Senate debated for
months before landing on an $18 billion plan.
As long as voters approve
the measure this November,
the bills will reduce the school tax rate,
increase the homestead exemption,
cap the taxable value on non homestead
properties valued at $5,000,000 or less,
double the franchise tax exemption,
and add three elected
positions to appraisal boards.
Texas leaders were warned not
to put buoys in the Rio Grande,
but did it anyway.
That's according to a new report
from the Dallas Morning News.
That warning came from the International
Boundary and Water Commission,
which is made-up of Mexican and US
authorities that manage boundary and
water treaties along the border.
According to documents obtained
by the Dallas Morning News,
the Commission raised concerns
about the state's activity on the
border as far back as December.
Governor Greg Abbott has argued Texas has
sovereign authority to defend the border.
The federal government argues
the state does not,
and the Justice Department is
suing Texas over the border buoys.
The hearing is scheduled for
later this month.
Meanwhile,
a group of Texas Democrats took
a trip to the border to see the
buoys on Tuesday after criticizing
the governor for installing them.
Members of Congress said they
wanted to see them up close.
Over the last few months,
even as border crossings have dropped,
Texas Governor Greg Abbott has
launched A barbaric, barbaric
campaign of cruelty against migrants.
Littering the Rio Grande with invisible
razor wire and other drowning
devices that are designed to injure,
maim and kill families were just
exercising their legal right to
seek asylum in the United States.
In November 2021, a Texas prison
guard arrived at work for her shift.
Seven months pregnant,
she started feeling labor pains
and told her supervisors she
wasn't allowed to leave for hours.
When she finally did get to the hospital,
she had a stillbirth and according to a
lawsuit, doctors say that baby would have
survived if she had gotten there sooner.
She's now suing the state
and Texas is fighting back,
in part by saying the fetus in an anti
abortion state doesn't clearly have rights.
Jolie McCullough, criminal justice
reporter for the Texas Tribune,
broke the story and joined me
to talk about what she learned.
Your latest report is pretty alarming.
Tell us what happened with this prison guard.
Right. So this was about a year and
a half ago. In November of 2021,
a seven month pregnant prison officer was
working her shift in Abilene and she felt
pains that she thought were contractions.
And she quickly alerted her supervisor
saying she needed to get to the hospital.
And according to a lawsuit she's filed,
she said she was told she was made to wait 2
1/2 hours before she was allowed to leave,
her supervisor telling her,
you know, not believing that she
was in labor or any kind,
basically saying she just wanted to go home.
When she was finally able to leave,
she went to the hospital and doctors,
unable to find a fetal heartbeat,
rushed her to emergency surgery and
her baby was delivered stillborn.
She and her husband are now suing the state.
What are they asking for in this lawsuit?
Right. So they are suing the state.
So this happened in again in November 2021.
She had taken some leave after
that and then she filed an
internal discrimination complaint
within the Texas prison system.
And she said, you know,
after months of not hearing anything,
that is when she and her husband sued
the sued the agency in federal court.
And they are asking for damages
for things like medical costs
for funeral expenses as well as
damages for pain and suffering.
One of the things I think really
stands out in this report,
besides obviously this really
heart wrenching story of a
family losing their baby is the
response from the AG's office.
Tell us about that.
Right. So this lawsuit was
first filed last October.
And as the state has moved forward,
they're trying to the state of Texas,
the Attorney General's office and the
Texas Department of Criminal Justice are
seeking to have this lawsuit tossed.
And the part of the reason that they're
arguing this is because they're saying,
you know this woman's fetus,
the seven month old fetus,
it does not clearly qualify
as as a person with rights,
which is very, you know,
very stark shift in tone from
what is usually the,
the Attorney General's office is one
that is known for and self-proclaimed
as one of a leader in defending
the unborn across the nation.
Right. And and you point out in
your report that the timing of this
is also significant because of
Roe V Wade and the Supreme Court.
Talk to us about that piece of this.
Right. So one of the arguments that
the state is has used, they're not
the only argument against these the,
the lack of possible rights for this
fetus is that they said this happened as,
as I said, in November of 2021,
seven months before the US Supreme
Court overturned Roe V Wade.
And so one of the arguments that
the attorney general's office
has made is that, you know you.
It's unclear even now if this fetus
would have rights as a person,
but especially back before
the Dobbs decision,
which overturned Roe V Wade and you.
It's less clear.
Essentially,
part of the things.
Not only is this a contrast in
the tone from the AG's office,
but also from the state's
Republican leadership who has
really fought in over the years,
passed laws in statute to say that
this fetus would have rights, right?
Right. We've had,
you know, decades now of laws of, you know,
pushes from the attorney general's.
But in legislation as well,
that's really defined in Texas
laws at least a person as someone,
basically as a unborn child since conception,
since fertilization,
very early stages of a pregnancy.
They're defining an unborn
child as an individual.
So it is it's interesting that in
this argument that in the federal
court they're leaning more on,
well, Roe V Wade had said it
wasn't necessarily a person.
So we we can't,
we can't be held responsible for this,
for this death.
Now,
do you see any political repercussions,
you know, coming from the AG's
office saying that's arguing this,
I mean it's unclear at this point.
The AG's office has not responded to
any of my questions about the story.
And what is known is
that you know historians,
legal historians who study fetal
rights issues Is this is really
considered to be it's expected to be
kind of the next step in this post
Roe V Wade world where abortion is now
able to be illegal in the state of Texas.
And the next step and up in other
states are focusing on what is when is
a person a person fetal personhood.
Is this next argument of lawsuits
that we're seeing start to bubble
up of do fetuses have rights And
it's something that the US Supreme
Court has not yet gone into,
has purposely avoided ruling on yet.
But it's more and more as we're seeing it.
There's questions as to how exactly
the the states that are defenders
of the unborn as they claim,
what are they considering in
terms of fetal rights?
And is it only used for
punitive measures such as,
you know,
someone who performs an abortion
could be charged with murder
versus providing care for pregnant
people for things like this,
where this woman is claiming she
needed to get she needed to leave
to care for her unborn child.
You can find a link to Mccullough's
full report on capeyou.com.
That's Texas this week.