Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribune’s daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.
A proposal is set to be discussed on Thursday in Lubbock, a rural Texas county neighboring New Mexico, which aims to criminalize traveling on local roads for the purpose of seeking an abortion.
The recent blockade proposal in Cochran County, which is inhabited by approximately 2,500 individuals, serves as another instance where a Texas county aims to limit certain individuals’ access to its highways. This action has been criticized by abortion-rights activists and legal scholars who argue that it is both unconstitutional and an attempt to instill fear.
Media reports indicate that at least two counties in Texas have granted approval for implementing bans of this nature. Cochran County is poised to become the first county bordering a state where abortion remains legal to enforce such a regulation.
Since Texas instituted the strictest abortion laws in the country in September 2021, thousands of Texans have traveled to New Mexico, as well as Kansas, Colorado and other states, to terminate their pregnancies. Several Texas abortion clinics, pushed out by what is now a near-total ban, have reopened in New Mexico — and been followed by anti-abortion activists.
Wendy Davis, a former state senator who currently serves as a senior adviser at Planned Parenthood Texas Votes, stated, “You might think that this won’t have any impact on you since it’s happening in a small town that you’ll never visit. However, this is a deliberate attempt to gradually enforce a statewide prohibition on traveling to other states, effectively establishing a reproductive confinement within the borders of Texas.”
At the time of publication, the Cochran County Commissioners Court members could not be reached. Judge Pat Henry, the county’s elected executive, mentioned in a conversation with the Texas Tribune that a commissioner had requested to include it in the agenda.
Mark Lee Dickson, the director of Right To Life of East Texas, a group opposing abortion and actively advocating for comparable local laws throughout the state, expressed confidence in their legal validity.
In a statement to The Texas Tribune, he clarified that the abortion trafficking ordinances do not infringe upon the right to travel. Instead, these ordinances solely penalize individuals who exploit county roads to transport pregnant women across state borders with the intention of obtaining an abortion.
Dickson’s group is circulating a letter signed by 20 state lawmakers, including Sen. Charles Perry of Lubbock, that calls on local governments to put these policies into place.
Cochran County, a small county located approximately 60 miles west of Lubbock, holds a significant position for pregnant individuals who are traveling. The county is intersected by three state highways, namely 114, 214, and 125.
Despite Texas having one of the strictest abortion bans in the United States, the battle for access to abortion is ongoing due to the implementation of travel ordinances. Advocates for these ordinances are employing a well-known strategy that depends on local governments enacting policies, resulting in a questionable legal framework that may result in legal disputes.
Charles “Rocky” Rhodes, a professor at South Texas College of Law, stated that the right to travel between states has been extensively safeguarded by numerous prior decisions of the Supreme Court.
Mitchell County, in West Texas, and Goliad County, near South Texas, passed similar ordinances earlier this year prohibiting traveling for abortions on county roads. Both rely on residents bringing civil action against others they believe violated the ordinance.
Rhodes highlighted two problematic aspects of this ordinance: the constitutional right to travel and the enforcement challenges it poses. In civil cases, Rhodes explained that the plaintiff usually needs to demonstrate personal injury caused by the defendant.
There was a similar provision in Texas’ 2021 ban — often referred to as Senate Bill 8 — on abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy that is enforced entirely through private lawsuits. So far, Rhodes said, Texas courts have rejected these lawsuits, saying the people who brought the test cases were unable to sue because they had not been directly impacted by the prohibited abortions
Rhodes mentioned the ongoing progress of the issue within the Texas appellate system, specifically alluding to laws such as the one enabling Texans to file lawsuits against individuals who undergo abortions after approximately six weeks of pregnancy.
Rhodes added, “Regarding these two issues, it’s important to view these ordinances as more of an intimidation tactic rather than a legally enforceable measure.”
Llano, a Central Texas city about 75 miles northwest of Austin, previously debated the so-called abortion trafficking ordinance, but the suggestion was temporarily tabled by the city council. In Chandler, about 13 miles west of Tyler, council members held off on passing the ordinance because of legal concerns.
The Washington Post reported that Chandler council member Janeice Lunsford said, “I believe we’re making a mistake if we do this.”
Davis argued that these ordinances, which aim to confuse and instill fear, are unenforceable due to the constitutional protection of the right to travel.
Davis argued that the notion of being able to ascertain if someone next to you on the road is headed for an abortion is laughable. He further dismissed the idea of implementing checkpoints to determine the purpose of someone’s travel within a community as completely absurd.
Davis emphasized that even though the rules may not be enforceable, they still carry significant consequences. Imposing more rules and using strong language could potentially alienate medical professionals and create an atmosphere of intimidation for pregnant individuals.
Davis expressed concern over the departure of OB-GYNs from our state and their reluctance to practice here in the future due to the presence of radical extremists. Ultimately, individuals seeking assistance in achieving healthy pregnancies, including those who desire to conceive, will suffer from limited medical access.
Disclosure: Planned Parenthood has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete list of them here.
As The Texas Tribune’s signature event of the year, The Texas Tribune Festival brings Texans closer to politics, policy and the day’s news from Texas and beyond. On Sept. 23, we wrapped our 2023 Festival — three lively days packed with 125+ sessions and events. Browse on-demand recordings and catch up on the biggest headlines from Festival events at the Tribune’s Festival news page.
