Off the Kuff Rotating Header Image

Lawsuit filed against Lubbock “abortion sanctuary city” ordinance

Looks like this kind of tactic will finally be tested in court.

Right there with them

Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas sued the city of Lubbock on Monday over a voter-approved “sanctuary city for the unborn” ordinance that seeks to outlaw abortions in the West Texas city’s limits.

The ordinance — which the lawsuit says is unconstitutional — was passed by local voters in May over the opposition of City Council members who warned it could not be enforced and would prompt a costly legal fight.

The lawsuit was filed in a federal district court and seeks to stop the abortion ban from taking effect on June 1.

Some two dozen cities have sought to ban abortions in their limits. Most of them have been in Texas but Lubbock is the largest and the first to have an abortion provider — making it a legal test case for the burgeoning “sanctuary city for the unborn” movement. Planned Parenthood opened a clinic to offer birth control and other services there last year, and began providing abortions this spring.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Texas previously sued seven East Texas towns that passed similar measures, but those cities weren’t home to abortion providers and had differently worded ordinances. The lawsuit was dropped.

The Lubbock ordinance would not be enforced by the government unless the Supreme Court overturned the landmark Roe v. Wade decision, or made other changes to abortion laws. It instead relies on private citizens filing lawsuits. Family members of a person who has an abortion can sue the provider or someone who assists them in getting an abortion, like by driving them to a clinic, under the ordinance.

The ordinance does not make an exception for people pregnant as a result of rape or incest.

See here for some background. As things stand now, it seems likely Lubbock will lose this lawsuit. Not that such a loss will dissuade the ordinance’s fanatical supporters of anything – among other things, they won’t be on the hook for the legal bills – but it’s something. Of course, a fresh new challenge to Roe v. Wade is now on the SCOTUS docket, so how things are now may not be how they will be as of sometime next year. It’s a lot of not great.

Related Posts:


  1. Jason Hochman says:

    Abortion laws violate the Equal Protection of the Fourteenth Amendment, and are unpatriotic. If a woman wants to have an abortion, it’s her choice and her body. The father of the child, and the woman’s husband (if not the father), have no say in this, and don’t even need to be informed. But, if the woman decides to have a baby, suddenly the father (and possibly her husband if he’s not also the father) are on the hook. The entire story switches to “he did this” and “his responsibility.” Then,his pay gets garnished, and, if he’s not actively involved as a father, the kid gets raised without his input, just his money, and everyone scowls at him for being an uninvolved father, and a deadbeat. This is just another way that men are victimized in our society.

  2. C.L. says:

    All pretty simple. If you don’t want to be a Father and all the physical/legal/moral responsibilities that come with it, don’t get a girl pregnant.

    True, sounds easier than it is, but that ‘prospect of reality’ should be first and foremost on the mind of every male with his pants down.

    Dr. Hochman, might be a draw…sorry, wrong word…landslide on what gender is more victimized in our society.

  3. Bill Daniels says:


    Personal responsibility, what you are advocating here, is both white supremacy defined, and explicit support of the patriarchy.


    little appreciation expressed among people for the work that others are doing; appreciation that is expressed usually directed to those who get most of the credit anyway
    more common is to point out either how the person or work is inadequate
    or even more common, to talk to others about the inadequacies of a person or their work without ever talking directly to them

    mistakes are seen as personal, i.e. they reflect badly on the person making them as opposed to being seen for what they are — mistakes

    making a mistake is confused with being a mistake, doing wrong with being wrong

    little time, energy, or money put into reflection or identifying lessons learned that can improve practice, in other words little or no learning from mistakes

    tendency to identify what is wrong; little ability to identify, name, and appreciate what is right”

    Your words are both hurtful and hateful towards BIPOC’s, who are not able to live up to your impossible White standard of personal responsibility. Well, let me correct that. The gays don’t get pregnant, but they do seem to have problems with spreading STD’s, including AIDS.

  4. Jason Hochman says:

    C.L., so what you are saying that it is all the man who “gets” the woman pregnant. She has no agency? And what if the man wants to be a father, but the woman is going to kill his child, even if the man says that he would be willing to raise the child as a single parent?

    Men are much more victimized in our society. In times of war, they can be drafted. Men have not shattered the glass ceiling of workplace mortality. Probably 90% of on the job deaths are men. Men are also more often victims of murder and assault. Men have a higher rate of suicide. No, men are the victims here, which is why so many of them see the light and want to “transition.”

  5. C.L. says:

    Wow, you two are a pair, a proverbial match made in heaven.

  6. Manny says:

    If the man wants to be a single parent, when men can get pregnant and carry a child to birth, maybe then such a proposal would be valid.

    Jason, liar, stupid, more lies, dumber, most lies, dumbest. Señor scientist, have you heard about DNA to determine parents? Is that not taught in bot school?

    Jason if you really feel so victimized, there are ways for you to change gender. Is that the reason why you want to change your gender?

    White people are so much superior according to the resident racist that visits Kuffner.

    Tin hatter and liar, quite a pair.

  7. Jason Hochman says:

    Yeah, one little correction here, what does DNA have to do with this discussion? The man could be determined the parent, want to raise his child, and the woman can still kill the child.

    Yeah one more correction. You can’t change your gender. At least not in the reproductive sense. A man who “transitions” to a woman, even with surgery can’t conceive. A woman who becomes a man can’t be a father, in the biological sense, although some “transmen” may have become pregnant when they stopped taking hormones. Sex reassignment surgery is a cosmetic and social thing. It doesn’t really change your gender. Men can’t get pregnant, and that is just the Science, not a plot of the patriarchy.

    That’s not a lie, not racism, the patriarchy, or nothing like that. It is The Science.

  8. C.L. says:

    Yeah, you lost me there too, Manny.

  9. Manny says:

    One should not pay attention to Jason’s response as with most of his drivel, he lies.

    Changing gender had nothing to do with the ability to get pregnant, had to do with his whiney victimhood that so-called men like Jason whine about. “Men are much more victimized in our society.”

    DNA was in response to Jason’s statement, ” But, if the woman decides to have a baby, suddenly the father (and possibly her husband if he’s not also the father) are on the hook.”

    At what point in the fetus can the parentship of the male be determined?

    From an article in the New York Times, “blood tests are becoming available that can determine paternity as early as the eighth or ninth week of pregnancy, without an invasive procedure that could cause a miscarriage.”

    What is being pregnant worth? Is the father of the child willing to pay $25 an hour for 24 hours until the child is born?

    A man should not have the ability to tell a woman what she can do with her body. Is she to be a slave to his whims for 9 months? For thousands of years that is what women were considered chattel the same as livestock.

    Kill the child, bullshit. A fetus is not a child, just like an oak seed is not a tree.

  10. Manny says:

    Jason, since you have the same inability to do the math as the orange buffoon that you adore, Trump, the man or father of the fetus, would have to pay the woman $162,00 and 25 dollars is on the low side cause I would not carry a child in my belly for that amount of money. Maybe whiny men like you would, who knows?

  11. Jason Hochman says:

    An interesting response. My point here is that the woman’s husband, even if not the biological father, is considered the “legal father,” in many legal systems. If for example, a man’s wife becomes pregnant, and he is not the biological father, her husband may want to raise her child and preserve his family.

    It’s interesting that you talk about the cost of a child…most people look at having a family as more than an economic transaction, maybe a little different than the cost of owning a boat or a vacation home.

    also interesting that you say that a fetus is not a child. If you’ve ever known a woman who had a miscarriage, did she say that she lost a fetus, or some tissue or cells, or an embryo? Also, religion, and many cultures disagree. Of course the Church teaches that life starts at conception, but, for example, in Korea, babies are born at age one.

  12. Manny says:

    A woman seeking an abortion is not a woman seeking a family. But, like most rules, there are exceptions.

    As to women and miscarriages, a woman decides to carry to term or not. Not all women think alike, just like I certainly don’t think as you do.

    Some religions teach that life starts at conception, not all religions. Men have made those rules as God sure did not.

    Out of curiosity, how many married women seek an abortion without the husband agreeing? What is the answer, Jason?

    Let us flip the question, Jason. How do you think a woman who has an abortion refers to the fetus?