Random Thoughts – Randocity!

Kate Cox is a pregnant 31 year old Texas Resident. Her doctor has informed her that her pregnancy is at serious risk. Her fetus has a rare genetic disorder that is very likely to result in a stillbirth outcome. As a result, this stillbirth could ultimately render Kate’s health at serious risk, it could risk potential future fertility issues and it could even be potentially fatal for Kate herself. Let’s explore.

Judicial Review

Kate has sued the state of Texas for a stay to allow her to have an abortion in the State of Texas. A lower Texas court ruled in Kate’s favor by issuing a stay of Texas’s strict anti-abortion law, thus allowing her to have an abortion. However, Ken Paxton quickly intervened and petitioned the Texas Supreme Court to rescind that lower court’s stay.

The Supreme Court has issued a summary judgement against the lower court ruling to prevent Kate from having an abortion in the State of Texas. The ruling cited that Kate’s medical circumstances don’t justify the lower courts ruling and don’t allow for her to have an abortion. Here’s where the problems for these judges (and Ken Paxton) arise.

Suing Court Judges

Court judges are granted absolute immunity when performing their judicial job duties so long as what the judges are doing remains within their jurisdiction. What is jurisdiction? That’s a really good question, one that needs another court to truly decide and clarify in a case like this.

Jurisdiction is, in short, whether the judge’s responsibility of being a judge is actually at play when the judge’s ruling took place. Meaning, as long as the judge exercised his or her judicial responsibilities faithfully both within the jurisdiction of the court (locale) and within the judge’s own specific jurisdiction (handling of judicial responsibilities), then the judge and by extension, all court staff performing court responsibilities enjoy absolute immunity from lawsuits. This means that so long as jurisdiction remains in place, then the judge’s absolute immunity prevents the judge (and staff) from being sued for his or her judicial actions in that court.

Where does jurisdiction end?

Good question. A question that doesn’t really have solid answers. In Kate’s case, jurisdiction should theoretically end once court judges (and legislators) begin dispensing medical advice. Not only is dispensing medical advice a practice limited to licensed doctors and other licensed medical professionals, dispensing medical advice is well outside of a judge’s jurisdiction unless they are also a duly licensed medical professional. Nothing in any court of law should allow or authorize a judge to practice medicine without a license. Not only is a judge not a doctor, dispensing medical advice is not part of ANY judge’s job description.

What does this mean? It means that any judge who chooses to intervene in a medical case and who opines that a person doesn’t fit the medical criteria for any specific medical treatment, THAT is the very definition of dispensing medical advice and, likewise, the illegal practicing of medicine.

Medical Business

If judges wish to get into the business of dispensing medical advice to defendants, then they should be required to not only attend medical school, they must also take on a medical license by passing the medical board exams for their state. Justices are not medical doctors and have no rights to dispense medical advice, not even in their court of law as a judge… which is why any rulings that duly dispense medical advice sit well and truly outside of any judge’s jurisdiction. However, because this is a legal issue, it would require another court to rule if what the judge decided fits within or outside of that judge’s judicial jurisdiction. From where this author sits, dispensing medical advice is not and should never be within a judge’s job role (aka jurisdiction).

Immunity Undone

What does this mean for cases like Kate’s in Texas? It means that Kate and her lawyer should sue each and every judge sitting on the Texas Supreme Court because each and everyone who made that medical advice ruling firmly went outside of their jurisdiction to make that medical advice ruling. Why? Because they are not dispensing justice, they are dispensing medical advice. No one should ever mistake a judge for a doctor or vice versa. When judges get into the medical business, they’re firmly well outside of their judicial jurisdictional boundaries.

When a judge falls outside of their jurisdictional boundaries, their absolute immunity is vacated and they are firmly subject to lawsuits. Specifically in this case, practicing medicine without a license, reckless endangerment, negligent homicide (should Kate die) and perhaps several others.

In Texas, being found guilty of practicing medicine without a license is a third degree felony, punishable by 2 to 10 years in prison and a fine of up to $10,000. Ken Paxton could also be found guilty of practicing medicine without a license depending on what wording was sent over to the Texas Supreme Court to urge them to review this case.

Kate’s Health

If the Texas Supreme Court continues to hold that Kate’s medical case is outside of the boundaries of medical intervention to warrant a Texas stay, then the judges have dispensed medical advice against her actual licensed medical doctor’s own medical advice. Since when have judges become medical doctors? Since when do judges hold medical degrees and medical licenses? Since when do judges orders override a medical professional? They don’t when those orders are considered medical advice. Herein requires a court to make a ruling involving jurisdiction over these judges.

Meaning, Kate Cox needs to request her lawyer to sue each and every Supreme Court Judge (and Ken Paxton) for practicing medicine in the State of Texas without a license on the merit that the judges went outside of their jurisdiction by practicing medicine without a license. Again, practicing medicine without a license is and should be considered outside of a judge’s jurisdiction. No judge should be practicing medicine as part of their judge job duties. Thus, their judicial immunity is trumped by their practicing of medicine illegally.

Whether a lawyer would want to take on such a case to 1) establish if jurisdiction has been breached and if so, 2) if the judges practiced medicine without a license. Let’s let the court establish if these judges violated jurisdiction and, if so, then let Kate’s case against them proceed.

If Texas wants to play novel games with women’s health, then these judges need to have those same novel legal games played against them… and here is, just as Julie Andrews once sang as Maria von Trapp, “a very good place to start.”

Disclaimer: This article is intended strictly for informational purposes only. This article is strictly opinion and not intended to be, nor should be considered nor construed as legal advice in any way. Always consult a licensed attorney for legal advice.

↩︎