The first visit is for an ultrasound and the second visit is for the procedure. Under SB 8, another ultrasound is required at your second visit to make sure you are still within the new legal limit for abortion treatment in Texas. If the second ultrasound shows that you have crossed this new legal limit, we can still help you access abortion treatments outside the state. Treatments for some pregnancy complications are different from abortions under Texas laws, experts say, but the confusion has already limited some patients` access to life-saving procedures and medications. The private civil law enforcement function was developed by former Stanford law professor Jonathan F. Mitchell.   The idea was based on his 2018 article «The Writ-of-Erasure Fallacy,» , which stated that laws applied exclusively by individuals are almost impossible to challenge in pre-enforcement proceedings. «The same is not true of these civil laws.» On September 18, 2021, San Antonio doctor Alan Braid admitted in a comment published by the Washington Post that he performed an abortion on September 6 that was illegal under the law. He explained that he had performed the abortion «because I had a duty of care to this patient, as I do for all patients, and because she has a fundamental right to this treatment.» He admitted that he would be subject to liability arising from civil actions related to the law.   «Texas is a very large state. So there are a lot of people trying to get care elsewhere,» says Kari White, a sociologist at the University of Texas at Austin. She has researched patients who have left Texas for abortions since SB 8 went into effect. Texas abortion providers, funders and other pro-abortion plaintiffs have filed a total of 14 other lawsuits, some before the law goes into effect on Sept.
1, 2021, against Texas Right to Life and the organization`s officers, employees, and employees, challenging SB 8 as unconstitutional under various provisions of the state constitution. The plaintiffs invoked the Texas Declaratory Judgments Act and sought a declaratory and injunctive relief. The individual lawsuits were then summarized by the Texas Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litiation (MDL Panel) for the preliminary proceedings and remain pending in a Travis County District Court. The MDL Committee appointed Hon. David Peeples, a senior judge, to preside over all 14 cases.  After the overthrow of Roe v. Wade, some Texas religious leaders came together to gain access to abortion and offered spiritual guidance in support of those seeking abortion. A Dallas attorney filed a lawsuit and injunction in Dallas, Texas district court to block the bill, arguing that the wording of the law prevents lawyers from consulting with clients about abortion, even in cases of rape and incest, and therefore violates solicitor-client privilege and the rights of victims of sexual abuse.
 This lawsuit was not appropriate and was resubmitted in Travis County, Austin, Texas, where it is pending, along with numerous abortion and donor cases, all represented by the same lawyers.