No specific federal regulations govern surrogacy. For a case as messy and complicated as this one, having a few in place might have made things easier.
Surrogate mother McKenna West, who rose to national prominence after moving to Texas to escape alleged demands to terminate the pregnancy by the biological parents, filed an emergency application with the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) on September 16, 2026. West is seeking the stay of an ex parte judgment of parentage issued to the intended parents, Omar Ahmed and Nausheen Gilkar, under California’s expedited procedure for parentage awards under surrogacy contracts. A Texas court gave full faith and credit to the California judgment on September 2.
At the center of the battle is the infant Rumi (also named Gabriel by West), who was diagnosed with a serious congenital heart defect while in the womb. West balked when Ahmed and Gilkar opted to invoke an abortion clause in the surrogacy contract, ultimately seeking protection under the Texas abortion bans. After a steady stream of defeats in court, West’s final shot at securing parental rights takes the form of an emergency appeal directed at Justice Elena Kagan. As of this writing, SCOTUS had not taken up the case.
Sign on the Dotted Line
While the laws can differ wildly between states, surrogacy is an agreement between a woman, who is either fertilized with sperm or has an embryo implanted, and the intended parents. In general, the carrier receives financial recompense for carrying the fetus to term and giving birth, although other benefits and stipulations are common as well. It’s as complicated as you might imagine, so using a legal contract is fairly standard.
Surrogacy contract terms can vary, but certain provisions are usually present. These can include the financial terms, who covers medical costs, restrictions on smoking, drug, and alcohol use, and the termination of any legal parental rights by the surrogate after the birth. While absent in states with bans, some surrogacy contracts include a clause that allows those scheduled to become the legal parents to request an abortion if the fetus has Down syndrome or a fetal abnormality.
Such was the case with the fetus being carried by West, who had an embryo implanted. At 20 weeks, it was diagnosed with Hypoplastic Left Heart Syndrome (HLHS). If left untreated, most afflicted will die within a few days of birth. Those with HLHS can expect a minimum of three surgeries in their first 18 months to four years of life. Surgeries are often more of a treatment than a cure, with the survival rate of those who don’t receive a heart transplant by age 35 under 33%.
According to West’s request for a SCOTUS emergency court order, Ahmed and Gilkar first requested, then demanded, that she have an abortion (the defendants admit they asked but deny that they demanded). Regardless of the grim survival odds and the contract's terms, West refused. She claims they sent her a demand letter threatening $250,000 in penalties if she didn’t have the abortion before filing a new parentage claim in California, allegedly in violation of the contract’s forum-selection clause specifying that all legal proceedings must take place in Alaska.
Having already suffered a string of defeats in court, West was fearful that Ahmed and Gilkar would allow the doctors to decide on the proper level of medical treatment at the birth instead of demanding potentially life-saving care. Her next step was to seek conservatorship in a state that wouldn’t allow an abortion - Texas.
Goin’ Back to Cali
West’s situation caught the attention of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. When West was induced into labor in the 37th week of her pregnancy, a Texas judge ordered the first life-saving surgery to be performed. Rumi was born on August 12, 2026, but a California court order barred West from either seeing or holding the child and withdrew her access to his medical information. When the ruling on September 2 established Ahmed and Gilkar as the legal parents, it soon received full credit under Texas law as well.
Unless SCOTUS chooses to intervene, the custody battle over Rumi/Gabriel may be over. After sharing that Rumi was in critical condition after the birth and “suffering from potential complications,” his parents haven’t provided any further updates on his health. In her filing to SCOTUS, West expresses the fear that Ahmed and Gilkar will opt to take Rumi to California for hospice care instead of continuing HLHS treatments. SCOTUS is under no obligation to rule on the case.
