Read the complete 2026-09-27 briefing
McKenna West loses Supreme Court bid in custody fight
Justice Elena Kagan denied West’s emergency bid, leaving the infant’s custody and care before the courts as the Texas mandamus petition remains pending.
West had asked the court to preserve her ability to advocate for the medically fragile infant and stay informed about his care1.
Contract and parental rights
The Daily Wire describes the custody case as centered on a dispute over abortion1. The Daily Wire reports that Gilkar and Ahmed sued West, alleging their surrogacy agreement included an abortion provision. The Daily Wire reports that West changed her mind about abortion after the baby’s heart condition was diagnosed, while the genetic parents say she had initially agreed to terminate the pregnancy1.
How the dispute unfolded
The rulings restricted West’s role in the case1. A Dallas judge temporarily barred West from making medical decisions during the pregnancy; a Texas judge later recognized the California parentage judgment and removed her from the case1. West’s attorneys warned that the infant could be taken from a Texas hospital to California for hospice, while alleging that the parents were challenging an order for medical care1. The Supreme Court of Texas said the child’s physician supported an ICU-to-ICU transfer to preserve his life and denied West’s request for temporary relief in the mandamus case2.
The medical stakes
The Daily Wire reports that the baby was diagnosed at 20 weeks with hypoplastic left heart syndrome1; the condition typically requires three staged surgeries1.
Texas case remains pending
Justice Elena Kagan denied West’s stay application on September 223; on September 17, the Texas Supreme Court said the mandamus petition remained pending2. The Texas court left open the possibility of future relief if circumstances changed, keeping the infant’s care and the adults’ authority before the courts2.