Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legal Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Advocates urge Scurry County to adopt 'Sanctuary for the Unborn' ordinance; legal counsel flags unclear county authority
Summary
A presenter urged the court to adopt an ordinance aimed at stopping cross‑state 'abortion trafficking' and forbidding Texas waste contractors from handling aborted remains; county legal counsel said he could find no clear legal mechanism authorizing the county to enact all elements but judged legal liability would be minimal if the court proceeded.
Get email alerts on the Legal Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
During a public presentation, a representative of Right to Life across Texas urged Scurry County commissioners to adopt a 'Sanctuary for the Unborn' ordinance that would prohibit cross‑state abortion trafficking and bar local waste contractors from transporting or disposing of fetal remains produced outside Texas.
Mark Lee Dixon, the presenter, described a model ordinance passed by other Texas counties and cities and cited the Texas Heartbeat Act and Texas Government Code sec. 311.036(b) as supporting legal authorities. He said the ordinance would create standing for private lawsuits against entities that facilitate cross‑state abortion services rather than directing county law‑enforcement to prosecute. Dixon and supporters argued the measure would deter out‑of‑state facilities targeting Texas residents.
County legal counsel told the court he had reviewed the materials and could find no clear, standalone mechanism authorizing the county to enact all elements of the proposed ordinance; he also said the county’s potential liability from passage appeared minimal. Commissioners and attendees debated whether the matter should be addressed by state lawmakers and whether a county resolution (nonbinding) would be an alternative to an ordinance. Supporters said an ordinance creates private‑right‑of‑action standing that resolutions do not.
No ordinance vote occurred; the item remained in public discussion and legal review at the close of the session.

