AUSTIN — A federal judge has issued an injunction blocking Texas from telling abortion providers and medical facilities how to dispose of fetal remains from abortions and miscarriages.

U.S. District Judge David Ezra ruled Wednesday that the Texas law requiring burial or cremation of the remains violates the due process and equal protection clauses of the 14th Amendment.

“The facts as I have found them, and it was not even a close call, show that this law would cause a violation of a woman’s right to obtain a legal abortion,” Ezra said. “If the law were to go into effect now, it would cause significant, if not catastrophic, disruptions to the health care system.”

The law also would have a dramatic impact on women who have miscarriages, who outnumber Texas women who seek abortions, he said.

A federal judge ruled a Texas law requiring fetal remains from abortions and miscarriages to be cremated or buried to be unconstitutional. (File Photo / The New York Times)

Attorney General Ken Paxton said the state would continue defending the law.

“Today’s ruling is disappointing, but I remain confident the courts will ultimately uphold the Texas law,” Paxton said in a prepared statement. “My office will continue to fight to uphold the law, which requires the dignified treatment of fetal remains, rather than allow health care facilities to dispose of the remains in sewers or landfills.”

The state has 30 days to appeal. If it does so, the case will move to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans.

The law passed last year as part of a larger anti-abortion measure, Senate Bill 8. Abortion providers sued the state health department, and at a five-day trial in July, their lawyers argued the law was unconstitutional and would place a burden on women seeking abortions and on abortion clinics.

Lawyers for the state argued that it would not and that the law was intended to bring dignity to unborn babies.

“Because treatment of the dead impacts treatment of the living, showing respect for fetal life does not terminate in the fetus’s death, just as society respects the bodies of dead humans,” state lawyers wrote in their closing argument.

Anti-abortion groups in Texas also defended the law, arguing that it’s about treating fetal tissue and remains with respect, not about restricting access to abortion.

If the law went into effect, abortions would remain available and would still be performed tens of thousands times per year, said Joe Pojman, executive director of Texas Alliance for Life.

“This law meets a compelling need to recognize the humanity of the unborn child,” he said.

Amy Hagstrom Miller, the founder, president and CEO of Whole Woman’s Health, said the law has no benefit for women, is unnecessary and is rooted in shame and stigma.

“Abortion is a normal medical procedure, part of regular medicine, and the tissues from abortion are managed in the same way that all medical tissues are managed in health care,” Miller said. “These restrictions do not respond to patient concerns. They are a political scheme.”

Miller said it would be difficult for abortion providers to secure vendors who offer burial and cremation services.

The Texas Conference of Catholic Bishops offered to pay for burial services to help health care facilities comply with the law, but Ezra ruled that the state has “no viable, integrated system in place for disposing of embryonic and fetal tissue remains.”

How could Roe vs. Wade play a role?

Since President Donald Trump selected Judge Brett Kavanaugh as his Supreme Court nominee in July, there has been speculation about whether the landmark abortion rights case, Roe vs. Wade, would be overturned.

Ezra addressed that during the trial and said he had to rule based on current law and precedent.

"I am not and cannot inform my decision predicated on what the Supreme Court may say on Roe v. Wade," he said during the trial in July.

The Senate's confirmation hearings for Kavanaugh began Tuesday, and votes could happen later this month. Kavanaugh could be on the bench by Oct. 1, when the court begins its term.

Timeline of the case:

July 2016: The Texas Health and Human Services Commission proposes the fetal remains rule to "ensure Texas laws maintained the highest standards of human dignity".

December 2016: Abortion providers sue the state, saying the regulations are unconstitutional. A federal judge bars Texas from implementing the rule, suspending it until January.

January 2017: The ruling is delayed and later blocked by the judge. He says the rules "likely are unconstitutionally vague and impose an undue burden on the right to an abortion."

May 2017: The Legislature passes Senate Bill 8, which included the fetal remains regulation and also prohibited a common second-trimester abortion procedure known medically as "dilation and evacuation," referred to as dismemberment abortion in the law. SB 8 also established a registry of funeral homes, cemeteries and nonprofits who are willing to provide services to dispose of fetal remains according to this new law.

September 2017: A federal judge blocks the law the day before it's to go into effect.

December 2017: Abortion providers sues again over the disposition portion the law. The case is handed to Judge Ezra and goes to trial the following July.

Sept. 5, 2018: Ezra issues an injunction blocking Texas from enforcing the law, declaring that it violates the Constitution's 14th Amendment.