Context:

A multistate custody dispute over a surrogate-born newborn with hypoplastic left heart syndrome ends with the Supreme Court declining to intervene, after California parents sought custody and had earlier proposed abortion following the heart defect. The surrogate, McKenna West, argued due process was denied when California awarded custody to the genetic parents, prompting a Texas court to mandate lifesaving care in Texas. The parents, Omar Ahmed and Nausheen Gilkar, faced assertions that West’s actions forced costly legal battles across states. The decision leaves in place existing custody arrangements while the infant’s medical needs are addressed, with no written Supreme Court ruling issued. The case highlights tensions between surrogacy contracts, state jurisdictions, and access to urgent medical care for a newborn.

Dive Deeper:

• McKenna West, a surrogate, gave birth in Texas to a baby named Gabriel after a California couple, Omar Ahmed and Nausheen Gilkar, used surrogacy arrangements.

• The couple reportedly asked West to terminate the pregnancy following the discovery of a heart defect, an action West refused, leading to a multistate custody dispute.

• California had awarded custody to the genetic parents, a ruling West argued violated her due process rights and sought to challenge in Alaska, where the contract specified legal disputes should be heard.

• Texas courts, with involvement from state officials including Attorney General Ken Paxton, ordered that the newborn receive lifesaving care in Texas due to the child’s critical condition after birth.

• West claimed the family’s pursuit of custody across California and Texas disrupted access to the baby’s health information and care, describing the situation as involving a potential conflict with the surrogacy contract.

• The Supreme Court, via Justice Elena Kagan, declined to issue a stay or intervene in the case, leaving the lower court rulings and custody framework intact without a written opinion.