McKenna West has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to pause a California parentage judgment that, according to her emergency application, led a Dallas judge to dismiss her from litigation over the infant she carried, escalating the multistate dispute over the child she calls Gabriel.
Omar Ahmed and Nausheen Gilkar, the child’s intended and genetic parents, call him Rumi.
The infant was born August 12 with hypoplastic left heart syndrome, a severe congenital heart defect, after West refused their prebirth request to terminate the pregnancy, as The Dallas Express previously reported.
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan requested a response Friday in docket No. 26A325 and set a 4 p.m. EDT September 18 deadline. The docket showed no order as of Saturday afternoon. A response request does not mean the Court has granted a stay or agreed to hear the merits.
West filed her emergency application Wednesday. She seeks an immediate administrative stay while Kagan and the Court consider her request, followed by a stay of the June 22 Los Angeles County parentage judgment pending her forthcoming petition for certiorari.
Alternatively, she asks the Court to treat the application as a certiorari petition, grant review and summarily reverse the California Court of Appeal’s denial of her writ petition.
The proposed stay would not itself award West custody or tell the Dallas court how to rule. “A stay would not decide who Baby G.’s parents are or direct any Texas court to do anything,” her filing says. West argues it would suspend the judgment that caused her dismissal in Texas, allowing her to ask the Dallas court to restore her as a party.
California judgment drives Texas ruling
The Los Angeles County Superior Court ruled June 12 that West made a general appearance, rejecting her position that she appeared only to contest personal jurisdiction. On June 22, the court entered judgment naming Ahmed and Gilkar the child’s legal parents, then stayed that judgment until birth.
West contends California misread her jurisdictional filing as consent and violated due process by deciding parentage without personal jurisdiction over her.
The trial court denied a stay July 17. The California Court of Appeal rejected emergency writ petitions July 27, July 31 and August 7. The first two orders cited an inadequate record, while the third offered no explanation.
The California Supreme Court denied review August 26. West’s direct appeal from the parentage judgment remains pending.
On August 11, before the child’s birth, a Dallas County court issued two temporary orders. One gave Ahmed and Gilkar custody and medical decision-making authority while barring West from contact with the child and access to his health information.
A separate order required all medically indicated stabilizing and life-sustaining treatment, barred anyone from obstructing that care and prohibited removal except for a medically necessary transfer.
Doctors performed the first-stage Norwood operation August 17. Gilkar later testified that she and Ahmed approved the procedure after doctors determined the child was a candidate.
According to West’s Supreme Court filing, a Dallas judge granted full faith and credit to the California judgment and dismissed West with prejudice September 2. That order remains sealed, so the public description rests on West’s filing.
Hospice allegation remains unproven
West’s emergency application alleges the infant could be taken to California and placed in hospice around September 17 if the Dallas court lifts the medical-care order. The filing presents that as a feared possibility, not an announced plan, medical directive or scheduled transfer.
Gilkar testified August 25 that she and Ahmed intended to authorize additional procedures if medically appropriate. Their attorney said on August 17 that the child’s condition remained critical and complex, and the family requested privacy.
Neither the Supreme Court docket nor its public attachments shows that Ahmed and Gilkar selected hospice or decided to withdraw treatment.
West’s filing also says Ahmed and Gilkar are challenging the separate Dallas medical order and seek to rescind it. The filing does not show that the Dallas court has dissolved that order.
What remains pending
Kagan has requested the respondents’ filing by September 18, and the Court has not ruled on West’s request. The application says West’s direct California appeal remains pending.
The public appendix shows that separate Alaska civil litigation remained open and undisposed through September 4. The Dallas case is sealed, leaving the precise post-September 2 status of its medical order unavailable for independent public confirmation.
The Supreme Court docket also lists amicus briefs from the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American College of Pediatricians, Americans United for Life and the State of Florida.
Provided by Dallas Express
