The #Texas #abortion case has been badly misreported, with reporters once again saying the exact opposite of what was in a ruling.
Texas's law does not prevent abortion in the case as it's been described, so it was always strange to hear that it was being blocked.
Well, the court spelled this out in its ruling, over and over in fact, trying to say it nine different ways so that there is no mistaking it. But the press misframed it nonetheless.
For example:
> "A pregnant woman does not need a court order to have a lifesaving abortion in Texas. Our ruling today does not block a life saving abortion in this very case if a physician determines that one is needed under the appropriate legal standard, using reasonable medical judgment."
@SarahBreau SCOTX said the opposite, that the abortion WAS allowed in such a case.
And SCOTX said so over and over in its ruling, trying to avoid people misinterpreting their ruling.
As for Paxton, I don't know or care what he said. If he threatened the doctor illegally then he needs to be called out on that.
I imagine he was grandstanding for political reasons.
@volkris If the law allows abortion in this case, why did SCOTX say the abortion was not allowed? Why did Paxton threaten the doctor if they performed the procedure?