I am going to throw out a lifeline to 93, kind of fair to do when new knowledge breaks forth.

This is limited to Texas.

In the 60's, the law that RvW enjoined was put on the books in 1925.

There it codified that an abortion with consent would be met with with a period of confinement between 2 and 5 years. Without consent was a term between 4 and 10 years. A death of the mother due to an abortion was codified as murder.

RvW did not repeal the 1925 law. It enjoined it. Directly.

There is an exception,, but limited to 'the purpose of saving the life of the mother', though it did not include preventing bodily injury to her.

When RvW fell, the injunction against the law fell as a direct matter. Not like Ohio, where the law was enjoined in a different case that applied RvW. RvW was overturned en toto, and the as part of that the included legal injunction fell. The Texas Legislature never repealed the 1925 law.

There was a case rapidly going through the state courts, stating that RvW 'effectively repealed' the 1925, and alternatively the effect of the fetal heartbeat bill superceded the 1925 law in substance, the trigger law which is to be effective in two months, or the 2013 bill did.

However, the Texas Supreme Court ruled the 1925 law was still valid. It was valid even after RvW, albeit it could not be enforced. The striking of RvW removed the ban on enforcement.

So to 93's ob/gyn friend in the locker room, I have to say that the Texas legal regime *was* very unclear and left them unclear on how to do abortions. They could not rely on the trigger law, since on its own terms it was not valid until two months after RvW, and that timeframe still hasnt cleared.

I havent read the full Texas Supreme Court decision, and dont know if the trigger law on a full ban will supercede the 1925 law. Both laws ban the procedure, but the exceptions are different re: the state of the mother.

And, it would seem that the trigger law does not preempt the fetal heartbeat bill in place either.

93s friend would not be unreasonable to be uncertain as to what the state of the law was. Now, it is clear the 1925 ban will be the law for about 30 more days, and will be superceded by the trigger law.