Texas court reverses injunction against midwife, but clinics remain closed

Maria Rojas trained for decades to be a midwife. She opened clinics in the Houston area—one in Waller, one in Cypress, one in Spring—and built a practice serving her community. Then, in March 2025, a court order shut them all down. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton had accused her of performing illegal abortions and practicing medicine without a license, and a Waller County judge issued an injunction that effectively ended her ability to work.

On Thursday, a higher court said the state had gotten it wrong. The 15th Court of Appeals reversed the injunction, finding that prosecutors had not presented sufficient evidence to justify closing the clinics. The court's written opinion was direct: the trial judge had improperly admitted evidence from a separate criminal case, and what remained was not enough to support the restraining order. For a moment, it looked like vindication.

But Rojas's attorney, Jenna Hudson from the Center for Reproductive Rights, was blunt about what the reversal actually meant: "The damage is done." The clinics have not reopened. Under the terms of her bond conditions, Rojas is not permitted to go near the clinic locations. She is under house arrest. She cannot practice midwifery. A career that spanned decades is over, regardless of what any court says about evidence.

Rojas is the first person to be sued under Texas's Human Life Protection Act, the law that bans abortion after six weeks with only narrow exceptions. She has pleaded not guilty to the criminal charges against her, and no trial date has been set. But the civil case—the one the appeals court just dismantled—has already extracted its cost. Hudson described the practical reality: Rojas "just doesn't have a career anymore." She trained to provide this care, drew satisfaction from it, and now cannot. The reversal of the injunction changes nothing about her daily life.

The state is not finished. Paxton's office announced Thursday that it intends to appeal the appeals court decision to the Texas Supreme Court. The statement framed the case as protecting "Texas women from Maria Rojas' illegal abortion scheme," claiming evidence showed she provided "unqualified medical advice" that led women to abort. The office also suggested it may seek another temporary restraining order in the trial court, starting the process over.

Meanwhile, Rojas waits. Her criminal defense attorney, Nicole Hochglaube, said her client is "hanging in there" despite being unable to work, though the process has been "very difficult." The appeals court decision vindicated her on the civil side—the state simply did not have the evidence. But that vindication came too late to save her clinics, her practice, or her ability to earn a living in the profession she chose. The reversal sends the case back to the trial court, where prosecutors could attempt to obtain another restraining order, beginning the cycle again. What happens next depends on whether Paxton's appeal to the state Supreme Court succeeds, and whether the lower court will try once more to shut down what it already has.