State of Texas v. City of San Antonio, Gina Ortiz Jones, in Her Official Capacity as Mayor of the City of San Antonio, and Erik Walsh, in His Official Capacity as City Manager of the City of San Antonio

ACCEPTED 15-25-00093-CV FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 9/19/2025 5:04 PM NO. 15-25-00093-CV CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE ______________________________________________ CLERK FILED IN IN THE FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS 15th COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS AUSTIN, TEXAS 9/19/2025 5:04:10 PM ______________________________________________ CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE Clerk THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellant, v. CITY OF SAN ANTONIO; GINA ORTIZ JONES, IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO; ERIK WALSH, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS CITY MANAGER OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, Appellees.

ON APPEAL FROM THE 407TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, BEXAR COUNTY CAUSE NO. 2025CI07833 _________________________________________________ APPELLEES’ UNOPPOSED MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL AS MOOT __________________________________________________ SCOTT, DOUGLASS CITY OF SAN ANTONIO & McCONNICO LLP Office of the City Attorney Kennon L. Wooten Litigation Division State Bar No. 24046624 Deborah Lynne Klein [email protected] Deputy City Attorney Lauren Ditty State Bar No. 11556750 State Bar No. 24116290 [email protected] [email protected] 203 S. St. Mary’s St., 2nd Floor Colorado Street, Suite 2400 San Antonio, Texas 78205 Austin, Texas 78701-2589 (210) 207-8940—Telephone (512) 495-6300—Telephone (210) 207-4357—Facsimile (512) 495-6399—Facsimile

TO THE HONORABLE COURT: Appellees—the City of San Antonio; Gina Ortiz Jones, in her official capacity as Mayor of the City of San Antonio;1 and Erik Walsh, in his official capacity as City Manager of the City of San Antonio (collectively, “the City”)—file this Unopposed Motion to Dismiss Appeal as Moot and, in support, show as follows.

1. On April 7, 2025, the State of Texas (“State”) filed a Petition and Application for Temporary Restraining Order and Injunctive Relief. In it, the State claimed that the City’s allocation of money to a Reproductive Justice Fund (“Fund”) violated the Gift Clause of the Texas Constitution. CR8-10.2 The alleged Gift Clause violation is premised on the State’s assertion that the City would spend money allocated to the Fund on “out-of-state abortions[,]” CR8, which was based on an ordinance that authorized an “expedited procurement” process “for downstream services to support reproductive and sexual healthcare services which may include out of State travel[.]” C90. The State sought a declaration that the City was “violating the state constitution’s gift clause by spending taxpayer money on support for out- of-state abortions, including travel for out-of-state abortions[,]” as well as temporary

When the underlying proceeding was filed in the district court, Ron Nirenberg was the Mayor of the City of San Antonio and, in that capacity, was named as a defendant in the lawsuit. Gina Ortiz Jones was elected as the Mayor of the City of San Antonio on June 7, 2025 and was sworn into office on June 18, 2025. Accordingly, Mayor Jones is substituted as a party to this appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 7.2(a) (addressing automatic substitution of public officer’s successor).

In this filing, “CR” is used to refer to the one-volume Clerk’s Record. and permanent injunctive relief to prohibit “allocation and expenditure of taxpayer dollars for support for out-of-state abortions, including out-of-state travel.” CR13.

2. On April 24, 2025, the City filed a Plea to the Jurisdiction based on ripeness. The City asserted, in pertinent part, that the City had not entered a contract with any organization related to the Fund or released any of the Fund, the City could not do so until after the City Council voted to authorize one or more contracts with organizations through a separate ordinance, the vote was not expected to occur until the end of June 2025, and the vote might not result in execution of contracts with organizations for assistance with travel out of state for legal abortion care. CR79-85.

3. On May 16, 2025, the trial court granted the Plea to the Jurisdiction and dismissed the case without prejudice. CR542.

4. On May 20, 2025, the State filed its Notice of Appeal. CR547. The State’s brief on the merits in this appeal is due on September 19, 2025.

5. Effective September 1, 2025, pursuant to Senate Bill 33 passed in the 89th Regular Session of the Legislature, the Texas Government Code was amended such that, as a general rule, “a governmental entity may not enter into a taxpayer resource transaction or appropriate or spend money to provide to any person logistical support for the express purpose of assisting a woman with procuring an abortion or the services of an abortion provider.” Tex. Gov’t Code § 2273.0031(a).

“Logistical support” is defined to “include[ ] providing money for: (1) child care; (2) travel or any form of transportation to or from an abortion provider; (3) lodging; (4) food or food preparation; (5) counseling that encourages a woman to have an abortion; and (6) any other service that facilitates the provision of an abortion.” Id. 6. The City has always intended that the Fund comply with the law in all respects. To that end, considering the above-referenced change in the law, the City will not vote to allocate any part of the Fund to support out-of-state travel for abortions. Thus, there is no longer a live controversy to resolve in this proceeding.

7. In sum, this appeal is moot. The City will honor and comply with the above-referenced change in the law and, therefore, will not allocate any part of the Fund in the manner the State sought to preclude in the underlying proceeding. See, e.g., Tex. Dep't of Family & Protective Servs. v. Grassroots Leadership, Inc., 717 S.W.3d 854, 863 (Tex. 2025) (“[T]here are no exceptions to the fundamental constitutional requirement that courts may reach the merits of only live disputes.”); Tex. Dep't of Fam. & Protective Servs. v. N.J., 644 S.W.3d 189, 192 (Tex. 2022) (“A case is moot when a justiciable controversy no longer exists between the parties or when the parties no longer have a legally cognizable interest in the outcome.”).

For the foregoing reasons, the City respectfully requests that this Court dismiss the appeal as moot.

Respectfully submitted, SCOTT DOUGLASS & McCONNICO LLP Colorado Street, Suite 2400 Austin, Texas 78701-2589 (512) 495-6300 (512) 495-6399 Fax By: /s/ Kennon L. Wooten Kennon L. Wooten State Bar No. 24046624 [email protected] Lauren Ditty State Bar No. 24116290 [email protected] CITY OF SAN ANTONIO Office of the City Attorney Litigation Division International Center S. St. Mary’s St., 2nd Floor San Antonio, Texas 78205 (210) 207-8940 (210) 207-4357 Fax Deborah Lynne Klein Deputy City Attorney State Bar No. 11556750 [email protected] Attorneys for Appellees

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE The undersigned counsel hereby certifies, pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 10.1(a)(5), that I contacted counsel for the State, Nathaniel Plemons, and he stated that the State is unopposed to the relief requested in the foregoing Motion to Dismiss Appeal as Moot.

/s/ Kennon L. Wooten Kennon L. Wooten

Automated Certificate of eService This automated certificate of service was created by the efiling system.

The filer served this document via email generated by the efiling system on the date and to the persons listed below. The rules governing certificates of service have not changed. Filers must still provide a certificate of service that complies with all applicable rules.

Jordan Kadjar on behalf of Kennon Wooten Bar No. 24046624 [email protected] Envelope ID: 105859842 Filing Code Description: Motion Filing Description: APPELLEES UNOPPOSED MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL AS MOOT Status as of 9/22/2025 7:17 AM CST Case Contacts Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status Kennon Wooten 24046624 [email protected] 9/19/2025 5:04:10 PM SENT Deborah Klein 11556750 [email protected] 9/19/2025 5:04:10 PM SENT Maria Williamson [email protected] 9/19/2025 5:04:10 PM SENT Lauren Ditty 24116290 [email protected] 9/19/2025 5:04:10 PM SENT Abril Rivera [email protected] 9/19/2025 5:04:10 PM SENT Jordan Kadjar [email protected] 9/19/2025 5:04:10 PM SENT Carla Matheson [email protected] 9/19/2025 5:04:10 PM SENT

Associated Case Party: The State of Texas Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status Amy Hilton 24097834 [email protected] 9/19/2025 5:04:10 PM SENT Katherine Pitcher 24143894 [email protected] 9/19/2025 5:04:10 PM SENT Nathaniel Plemons [email protected] 9/19/2025 5:04:10 PM SENT