SAN ANTONIO \u2013 Attorney General Ken Paxton is claiming victory over San Antonio and its controversial Reproductive Justice Fund. <\/p>\n
However, his announcement comes nearly four months after the city already said the fund, due to a change in state law, would not be used to help women seeking abortions travel to get legal, out-of-state procedures.<\/p>\n
\u201cFollowing Attorney General Paxton\u2019s aggressive legal action and the passage of Senate Bill 33, which bans taxpayer funds from being used to fund abortion-related activities, the City of San Antonio has capitulated and has officially ended abortion tourism programs,\u201d a Friday morning news release from his office stated.<\/p>\n
Paxton is currently running for the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate.<\/p>\n
The city council created a $500,000 pot of money in 2023 after the Supreme Court decided to overturn Roe v. Wade in 2022. Initially, the fund was intended to include out-of-state travel costs for abortion seekers due to abortions almost being entirely banned in Texas.<\/p>\n
However, after out-of-state travel funds didn\u2019t make the cut to get any of that money, the council added another $100,000<\/a> in April 2025.<\/p>\n Paxton immediately sued<\/a> the city shortly after the second round of funding. Though the case was dismissed from district court, he appealed to the 15th Court of Appeals.<\/p>\n In the meantime, the Texas Legislature passed Senate Bill 33<\/a> in May 2025, and Gov. Greg Abbott signed it into law in June. The bill prohibits cities and other government entities from providing public money to help with logistical support for women seeking abortions.<\/p>\n After the law took effect in September, the city asked for the appeal to be dismissed<\/a>.<\/p>\n \u201cThe City has always intended that the Fund comply with the law in all respects,\u201d its attorneys wrote. \u201cTo that end, considering the above-referenced change in the law, the City will not vote to allocate any part of the Fund to support out-of-state travel for abortions. Thus, there is no longer a live controversy to resolve in this proceeding.\u201d<\/p>\n The 15th Court of Appeals dismissed the case in an Oct. 9 ruling.<\/p>\n