Well, this is quite the plot twist.
Liberal women in red states that have restricted or banned abortion after six weeks of pregnancy have reportedly fled to blue, i.e., abortion-friendly states like Massachusetts, in order to obtain one without issue. However, on Tuesday, a surrogate mother reportedly fled from California to Texas in order to save the baby she is carrying for a California couple. The reason? After testing revealed the preborn child would be born with a birth defect, the couple allegedly demanded the surrogate mother have an abortion.
Now Texas Attorney General and Republican nominee for U.S. Senate Ken Paxton has stepped in. In a 58-page brief, Paxton moves for the State of Texas to intervene in the medical decisions of the preborn child over the intended parents, and to demand that Dallas hospitals administer life-saving treatment to the child after he is born.
BREAKING: I am fighting to save an unborn child diagnosed with a treatable heart condition and am demanding that Dallas hospitals provide life-saving care. pic.twitter.com/GWjEzRqYrk
— Attorney General Ken Paxton (@KenPaxtonTX) August 11, 2026
Paxton's press release read:
Attorney General Ken Paxton has intervened in a Dallas County parentage case to protect the life of an unborn child who is expected to be born imminently with a serious but treatable heart condition. The Office of the Attorney General has also formally notified UT Southwestern Medical Center ("UT Southwestern") and Children's Medical Center of Dallas ("Dallas Children's") of their legal obligation to provide the baby with medically necessary, life-saving care upon birth.
At around the 20-week mark, the child now known as "Baby Gabriel" was diagnosed in utero with hypoplastic left heart syndrome ("HLHS"), a serious congenital heart defect which is almost always fatal without immediate treatment. But with the three-stage treatment involving the Norwood procedure shortly after birth, followed by two others within the first three years of life, Baby Gabriel would have around a 70 percent chance of survival.
According to the brief, Baby Gabriel's intended parents allegedly demanded that McKenna West, the surrogate mother, abort the child. West reportedly refused and traveled to Texas for protection. West did this deliberately to ensure 1) that she received the protections Texas affords the preborn, and 2) to ensure that Baby Gabriel would be near doctors who were experienced in treating HLHS.
The intended parents have refused to agree that they will consent to the life-saving surgery upon birth and may attempt to transport the child out of Texas to prevent treatment from being administered.
Talk about deliberate cruelty. My RedState colleague Brandon Morse highlighted this dystopian worldview in a similar story, where a Canadian gay couple sued the surrogate mother because she refused to abort the child at 22 weeks simply because it would be born with a cleft palate, a condition that is highly treatable.
"The intended parents have stated they will refuse consent for surgery and allow the child to die."
— Eithan Haim MD (@EithanDHaimMD) August 11, 2026
This is the intention of the California couple who want to take baby Gabriel out of UTSW in Dallas. They want to let him die because he is defective, even though his condition is… https://t.co/xNgSURJKog pic.twitter.com/NuMUfIFzzm
"The intended parents have stated they will refuse consent for surgery and allow the child to die."
This is [allegedy] the intention of the California couple who want to take baby Gabriel out of UTSW in Dallas. They want to let him die because he is defective, even though his condition is treatable.
AG Paxton and his team at the TX AG's Office are standing against it though: "The child about to be born in Dallas County will be a person, a Texan, and this Court’s ward in the oldest sense of the parens patriae tradition. The agreement that arranged his conception cannot require his death."
BREAKING UPDATE ON SURROGATE MOM MCKENNA
— Lila Rose (@LilaGraceRose) August 10, 2026
McKenna will appear at a Texas hearing tomorrow that could determine who gets to make medical decisions for Baby Gabriel.
If the buying parents get to make the decision they may just offer him “comfort care” which would leave him to die.… pic.twitter.com/f8PPVmrkQC
BREAKING UPDATE ON SURROGATE MOM MCKENNA
McKenna will appear at a Texas hearing tomorrow that could determine who gets to make medical decisions for Baby Gabriel.
If the buying parents get to make the decision they may just offer him “comfort care” which would leave him to die. McKenna wants to ensure baby Gabriel receives life saving surgery.
Tomorrow’s hearing could determine whether he lives or dies.
Pray for McKenna and Baby Gabriel!
The release reported that AG Paxton had filed for immediate legal intervention and that the hospital would administer life-saving care to Baby Gabriel.
Attorney General Paxyon has filed an intervention in the case and asked the district court to enter orders directing the child's care upon birth, prohibiting his removal from the state, and setting an expedited hearing on any refusal of treatment. In a letter sent to UT Southwestern and Dallas Children's, Attorney General Paxton laid out the physicians' independent legal duty to provide the child treatment regardless of how the parentage dispute is ultimately resolved. The letter makes clear that physicians may provide baby Gabriel with emergency life-sustaining treatment without parental consent or a court order. Attorney General Paxton urged the hospitals to provide life-saving care and reject any unlawful transfer of the baby out of state.
As this plays out, it not only has national implications, but will have even further-reaching consequences. The fact that Paxton is running in a Senate race has already elevated the nature of this discourse, and could well polish his credentials as a fighter for the rights of all people. In the case of a surrogate mother's refusal to undergo abortion or even a change of heart on surrendering the child, it seems "my body, my choice" does not factor into these purportedly legally-binding agreements.
If Texas is successful in blocking the intended parents' supposed rights, it will open up a can of worms even more wriggly than their Heartbeat law. Then there is the dignity of the preborn, something on which pro-life activists, advocates, and abolitionists have been beating the drum for decades. Even if the child is born with a defect, it should not disqualify him or her from the right to be born alive, or the right to medical intervention to sustain life, correct or mitigate the defect, and increase the odds of having a full life.
Surgical abortions and the supposed ease of the abortion pill have sought to bypass this moral conundrum altogether. Funny how with each move on both the Left and the Right to dismiss this dilemma, it continues to smack them square in the face, demanding to be answered.
Editor’s Note: The 2026 Midterms will determine the fate of President Trump’s America First agenda. Republicans must maintain control of both chambers of Congress.
Help RedState continue to report on the Democrats’ radicalism and inform voters as our nation faces a crossroads. Join RedState VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member