Supreme Court Declines Surrogate's Bid In Cross-State Custody Fight
On Tuesday, September 22, 2026, Justice Elena Kagan rejected an emergency appeal from surrogate McKenna West to block a California parentage order in a cross-state custody dispute.[1]
California courts have declared Omar Ahmed and Nausheen Gilkar the child's legal parents, while a Texas court has said the couple controls the boy's medical decisions.[1] West carried the boy under a surrogacy contract that allowed the intended parents to seek an abortion after a fetal abnormality diagnosis; she refused and delivered in Texas last month.[1] The infant, born with hypoplastic left heart syndrome, underwent a Norwood procedure in Texas after Attorney General Ken Paxton won a court order requiring lifesaving care.[1] Ahmed and Gilkar told the Court they are keeping the baby in a pediatric intensive care unit and oppose changing who makes medical decisions in the middle of care.[1]
West had signed the surrogacy contract with Ahmed and Gilkar, and the contract included a clause giving the intended parents the right to request an abortion after a fetal abnormality was identified.[1] When she declined that request, the parties sought competing court orders in California and Texas, producing a legal clash over who may direct the child's medical care where he was born.[1]
Show source details & analysis (1 source)
📌 Key Facts
- On Tuesday, September 22, 2026, Justice Elena Kagan rejected surrogate McKenna West's emergency appeal to block a California parentage order.
- California courts have declared California couple Omar Ahmed and Nausheen Gilkar the legal parents of the baby, while a Texas court says they control his medical decisions.
- West carried the boy under a surrogacy contract that allowed the intended parents to demand an abortion after a fetal abnormality diagnosis; she refused and delivered in Texas last month.
- The child, born with hypoplastic left heart syndrome, underwent a Norwood procedure in Texas after Attorney General Ken Paxton previously obtained a court order requiring lifesaving care.
- Ahmed and Gilkar told the Court they are ensuring the baby receives critical treatment in a pediatric intensive care unit and are opposed to changing decision-making authority mid-care.
📰 Source Timeline (1)
Follow how coverage of this story developed over time