Shield Law Protects Doctor from Texas Judgment
A New York judge dismissed a legal challenge Friday from Texas seeking to enforce a more than $100,000 civil judgment against a doctor accused of prescribing abortion pills to a Dallas-area woman in an early test of the state’s “shield law” designed to protect providers.
Republican Texas State Attorney General Ken Paxton wanted a New York court to enforce a civil decision from Texas against Dr. Margaret Carpenter, who practices north of New York City in Ulster County, for allegedly prescribing abortion medication via telemedicine.
Background of the Case
Related
But acting Ulster County Clerk Taylor Bruck refused to file the judgment, saying he was a government employee who had to comply with New York’s shield law, which protects providers from other states’ reach.
New York is among at least eight states with shield laws. Opponents of the laws argue they violate a constitutional requirement that states respect the laws and legal judgments of other states.
Shield Laws and Their Implications
Shield laws are designed to protect healthcare providers from other states’ laws that may restrict their ability to provide certain medical services, such as abortion. These laws have been enacted in response to the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, which has led to a patchwork of laws across the country regarding abortion access.
Supporters of shield laws argue that they are necessary to protect the rights of patients and providers, while opponents argue that they undermine the authority of other states’ laws and create confusion and uncertainty.
Political Points
Judge’s Ruling
Justice David Gandin ruled that Bruck followed New York law and granted his motion to dismiss the petition from Texas. The judge, sitting in Kingston, wrote that the medical services Carpenter rendered are legal in New York and that they fall “squarely within the definition of ‘legally protected health activity’” under the state’s shield law.
Bruck said he was relieved.
“It seemed very clear to me that as a government employee I should not be complying with this,” he said. “Since there was no precedent for the shield law yet, it feels really good to set that precedent.”
Next Steps
It was not clear if the trial court judge’s ruling would be appealed. An email seeking comment was sent to Paxton’s office.
A Texas judge in February ordered Carpenter to pay more than $100,000 in penalties for prescribing abortion pills to a woman near Dallas after she failed to appear in court. The judge also issued an injunction barring Carpenter from prescribing abortion medication to Texas residents.
The ruling in Texas was handed down on the same day New York Gov. Kathy Hochul rejected a request from Louisiana to extradite Carpenter, who was charged in that state with prescribing abortion pills to a pregnant minor.
Gandin also denied a motion from Democratic New York Attorney General Letitia James to intervene in the case, which could have escalated the interstate court battle. The judge said her intervention was not warranted because the constitutionality of New York’s shield law was not at issue in this case.
Conclusion
The ruling in this case highlights the ongoing debate over shield laws and their implications for healthcare providers and patients. As the landscape of abortion access continues to evolve, it is likely that we will see more cases like this one, testing the boundaries of these laws and their ability to protect providers and patients.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a shield law?
A shield law is a law that protects healthcare providers from other states’ laws that may restrict their ability to provide certain medical services, such as abortion.
Which states have shield laws?
At least eight states, including New York, have enacted shield laws to protect healthcare providers.
What is the purpose of shield laws?
The purpose of shield laws is to protect the rights of patients and providers, and to ensure that healthcare providers can provide necessary medical services without fear of prosecution or penalty from other states.
Are shield laws constitutional?
The constitutionality of shield laws is a matter of debate, with some arguing that they violate the constitutional requirement that states respect the laws and legal judgments of other states.
