San Antonio has ceased its out-of-state abortion travel fund in response to new Texas legislation prohibiting public funds for abortion-related expenses and following a lawsuit from the state. Last year, city officials earmarked $100,000 for their Reproductive Justice Fund to help cover travel for abortion services. This decision drew ire from Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who filed a suit accusing the city of intentionally undermining Texas laws and public policy.
Attorney General Paxton declared a legal victory last Friday, announcing the dismissal of the case without any findings from either side. He stated, “Texas respects the sanctity of unborn life, and I will always do everything in my power to prevent radicals from manipulating the system to murder innocent babies.” Paxton further emphasized that it is illegal for cities to use taxpayer funds to finance what he labeled “abortion tourism,” asserting that San Antonio’s efforts to support residents seeking out-of-state procedures ultimately failed.
However, the city attorney contested Paxton’s interpretation, asserting that San Antonio acted within its rights. In a response to The Texas Tribune, the office noted, “This litigation was both initiated and abandoned by the State of Texas. In other words, the City did not drop any claims; the State of Texas, through the Texas Office of the Attorney General, dropped its claims.” This counterargument highlights a complex dynamic between city governance and state authority.
The crux of Paxton’s lawsuit centered on the claim that the travel fund violates the gift clause of the Texas Constitution. Earlier this year, the 15th Court of Appeals sided with Paxton, granting an injunction to block the city from distributing funds while the legal proceedings unfolded. The situation escalated in August when Governor Greg Abbott signed Senate Bill 33 into law, which explicitly banned public funds for any form of logistical support for abortion, empowering Texas residents to sue municipalities that violate this mandate.
According to San Antonio’s city attorney’s office, the city interpreted the law, prior to SB 33, as permitting the use of the fund for travel associated with out-of-state abortions. They maintained that following the enactment of the new law, the city discontinued plans for those specific fund uses, demonstrating a willingness to adhere to legal standards. They stated, “After SB 33 became law and no longer allowed those uses, the City did not proceed with the procurement of those specific uses—consistent with its intent all along that it would follow the law.”
Despite the closure of the travel fund, the broader Reproductive Justice Fund remains operational. However, it is now restricted to providing services that do not include abortions, focusing on essential healthcare measures such as home pregnancy tests, emergency contraception, and STI testing. Similarly, the city of Austin has also dismantled its abortion travel fund after it allocated $400,000 to its Reproductive Healthcare Logistics Fund for 2024, assisting women traveling out of state for abortion services, including support for travel, food, and lodging.
These legal maneuvers and policy changes reflect an ongoing struggle over reproductive rights in Texas, embodying larger national debates surrounding abortion access and funding. As cities navigate the implications of state laws, the focus remains on how public resources can—and cannot—be aligned with the evolving legal and ethical landscapes concerning reproductive health.
"*" indicates required fields
