AUSTIN, Texas — Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is suing the city of Austin for using taxpayer money to pay for out-of-state travel for abortion services.
In the approved fiscal year 2024-25 budget, Austin City Council members allocated $400,000 to the city's "Reproductive Health Grant," which is meant to reimburse Austinites who travel to get an abortion. Abortions are banned in Texas unless a patient's life or a major bodily function is in danger.
The AG calls the grant an illegal use of public funding, violating the Texas Constitution's "Gift Clause." The lawsuit – which lists the city of Austin, Mayor Kirk Watson and City Manager T.C. Broadnax as defendants – aims to halt any distribution of the funding.
"No city in Texas has the authority to spend taxpayer money in this manner," Paxton said in a statement, adding, "The Texas Constitution prohibits governmental entities from doing so."
This is not the first time the city has been sued over the Reproductive Health Grant. In August, former councilmember Don Zimmerman sued the city, also claiming that Austin is violating the Texas Constitution's Gift Clause.
Last month, the Austin City Council approved a resolution declaring that "reproductive rights are human rights." The resolution aimed to assert the city's "commitment to protecting access to abortion care" and reinforce the city's stance that "no one should be criminalized for seeking or providing essential healthcare, including abortion services."
Reaction to Paxton's lawsuit
KVUE reached out to Councilmember Paige Ellis, who was one of the co-sponsors of the budget item. Ellis said as a Central Texan, she knows how difficult it is to access medical care that isn't available.
While abortions are banned in Texas, Ellis said there are plenty of neighboring states willing to provide abortions, and she will do what she can to keep her constituents healthy and alive.
"It's very sad," Ellis said. "There are people that are in danger. Mothers are dying because they're having miscarriages, and they can't get access to abortion care. We are trying to protect Texas families, and that's clearly not the intent of our attorney general."
On the other hand, Councilmember Mackenzie Kelly said the lawsuits frustrate her as a taxpayer and government official.
Kelly – the sole councilmember to vote against the budget item, as well as the only Republican on the Austin City Council – said it's not the role of local government to fund this and she foresaw it becoming a potential problem.
"I don't think the local government should go outside of the municipal code or the city charter in order to fund things, regardless of how individuals feel on either side of the issue," Kelly said. "It's important to remember that our jobs as council members are to stay within those two sandboxes and not to venture outside of it because when that happens, we get sued."
Austin Councilmember Vanessa Fuentes responded to Paxton's lawsuit on X shortly after his office made the announcement Friday morning.
"Ken Paxton should focus on actually helping Texans instead of suppressing communities for promoting healthcare," Fuentes' post read. "Reproductive care is essential healthcare and these actions only further undermine local efforts to uphold bodily freedom. It's disappointing, but not surprising."
Roughly an hour and a half after Paxton's announcement, Mayor Kirk Watson also responded to the lawsuit on social media, saying:
"Ken Paxton is once again exploiting the great power of his office to attack and undermine the fundamental rights of women and try to score a few political points in the process.
I’m proud the Austin City Council is supporting Austin women as they make their own decisions about their body, their family, their health, their happiness, and their quality of life. I stood up and fought for reproductive rights throughout my time in office, including in the Texas Senate, and I will not back down in City Hall.
Texas women deserve better than to have their state and Ken Paxton attacking their fundamental freedoms."