Supreme Court refuses to step into surrogate custody fight over heart-defective newborn
Justice Elena Kagan denied a request to intervene in a multistate custody dispute involving a surrogate and the parents of a baby born with a severe heart defect.
The U.S. Supreme Court, through Justice Elena Kagan, declined to grant a stay in a custody battle that pits surrogate McKenna West against the biological parents, Omar Ahmed and Nausheen Gilkar. West, a cardiac nurse from Anchorage, gave birth to the baby in Texas and contended that California’s custody award denied her due process. A Texas judge had already dismissed her suit, prompting her appeal to the high court, which issued a brief order without a written opinion.
The infant, born with hypoplastic left heart syndrome, requires urgent medical treatment, and West fears the parents will not provide it. The parents maintain that the child will receive appropriate care in California, where a recent Texas Supreme Court decision allowed the transfer. The dispute also involves a surrogacy contract clause permitting termination for fetal abnormalities, which the parents attempted to invoke but West refused.
Why it matters
The case highlights the Supreme Court's limited role in complex interstate surrogacy disputes affecting a critically ill infant.
How the sides frame it
MODERATE AGREEMENTAll camps report that the Supreme Court declined to intervene in the surrogate-baby custody dispute, but left-leaning and centrist coverage emphasize the legal process and the baby’s medical urgency, while right-leaning coverage highlights the surrogate’s aborted-pregnancy request and frames the decision as leaving custody with the biological parents.
LEFT
Left-leaning coverage frames the story as the Court refusing to step into a complex custody fight, noting the surrogate’s due-process concerns and the infant’s critical heart condition.
RIGHT
Right-leaning coverage frames the story as the Court leaving custody with the biological parents, stressing the surrogate’s aborted-pregnancy request and the parents’ commitment to the child’s care.
The left emphasises
- court declined to intervene
- surrogate argues due process denied
- infant has hypoplastic left heart syndrome needing care
The right emphasises
- court left custody with biological parents
- surrogate had been asked to abort after defect discovered
- parents reject ‘right-to-life’ argument and stress medical care
In this story
