Earlier this month, a Texas judge granted an injunction to halt a New York doctor, Margaret Daley Carpenter, from prescribing and sending medication abortion pills to patients in Texas and imposed a $100,000 fine. The case is the first known to openly challenge an abortion shield law, passed by eighteen states and the District of Columbia in response to the Supreme Court striking down Roe v. Wade in 2022, and is expected to make its way to the highest court.
Dr. Carpenter is a reproductive health specialist based in New Paltz, New York, and co-founder of the Abortion Coalition for Telemedicine, which advocates for providing access to abortion medications in all 50 states. In December, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton charged her with violating Texas law by providing two abortion medications (mifepristone and misoprostol) by mail to a 20-year-old woman in Texas that resulted in a medical abortion. Dr. Carpenter, who is facing similar charges in Louisiana, has not appeared in court in Texas, resulting in the judge declaring a default judgment in favor of the State. Instead, she is relying on the State of New York’s Abortion Shield Law to protect her from any punishment the State of Texas may try to exact from her activities.
Abortion shield laws are designed to protect providers and patient medical records from civil and criminal consequences from assisting out-of-state patients with abortions, such as extradition, subpoenas, or medical records requests. Championed as a way to circumvent red-state abortion restrictions, pro-choice groups such as the Center for Reproductive Rights have proposed shield laws as the best solution to maintaining access to abortion care nationwide. Red states such as Texas, argue that these laws erode their state sovereignty and go against the full faith and credit clause of the Constitution, which requires states to honor the final judgments of courts in other states. Additionally, it is undisputed that the laws go against long-standing precedent of interstate cooperation and sharing of information. New York will likely argue that Texas has no jurisdiction over New York providers and Texas cannot get the assistance of the New York courts because of the shield law.
Despite stringent restrictions imposed on abortions in the wake of the Dobbs decision, it is estimated that more than 10,000 pills per month are sent to women in states with bans. If shield laws are found to be unconstitutional, it could be the final nail in the coffin for abortion access in much of the country, and abortion providers acting under the protection of these laws could find themselves in legal jeopardy.
On February 3rd, New York Governor Kathy Hochul signed into law a bill adding an extra layer of protection for providers, beyond their initial shield law, by allowing pharmacies to print a practice’s name on pill bottles rather than the prescriber’s. The Governor reiterated she would stand firm with abortion care providers and would not sign off on any extradition orders. The move seemed to signal that the State of New York will not give way to Texas or any other state’s demands, and they will see Attorney General Paxton in court.