WALLER COUNTY — The Fifteenth Court of Appeals reversed a temporary injunction that shut down Maria Margarita Rojas' clinics. The court found the state did not present sufficient admissible evidence to justify the injunction against Rojas and her affiliated clinics.

The appeals court reversed the injunction and sent the civil case back to the trial court for further proceedings. The court emphasized that its ruling does not determine whether the allegations against Rojas are true.

“Although the suit underlying this interlocutory appeal involves allegations that the appellants, a licensed midwife and a group of associated clinics, performed illegal abortions and practiced medicine without a license, this opinion does not decide whether those acts occurred,” Justice Scott Field wrote.

The court found the Waller County trial court improperly admitted probable-cause affidavits from Rojas’ separate criminal case during the civil injunction hearing. During the temporary-injunction hearing, the state introduced the arrest warrants and probable-cause affidavits. Rojas’ attorneys objected, arguing the affidavits contained hearsay. The appeals court cited a longstanding Texas rule that affidavits generally cannot be used as evidence to support a temporary injunction unless both sides agree.

“Here, the State does not contend, and the record does not reveal, that the parties reached an agreement to allow for the admission of the affidavits,” the court wrote. The judges found that once the affidavits were removed from consideration, the remaining evidence did not reasonably support the state’s allegations that abortions had been performed at the clinics.

“We conclude that the trial court improperly admitted probable-cause affidavits from a related but separate criminal case and that the remaining evidence is insufficient to reasonably support the existence of a probable right of recovery,” the court wrote.

Rojas was the state’s only witness during the injunction hearing, and she invoked her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. The appeals court found that Rojas’ decision not to answer questions was not enough on its own to support a finding that she or the clinics performed abortions. The state presented clinic website printouts advertising “Doctor Examination” and “Procedures and Minor Surgeries.” The court found the state’s lawsuit alleged only that Rojas violated the Medical Practice Act by performing abortions without a physician’s license.

A Waller County judge issued the temporary injunction in March 2025. “This network of clinics illegally aborted unborn children and practiced medicine without a license, intentionally deceiving and endangering the communities they claimed to serve,” Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said in a March 2025 statement.

The Texas Attorney General’s Office began investigating Rojas and the clinics in 2025 after receiving an anonymous email alleging that abortions had been performed at one of the locations. Three days after Rojas’ arrest, the state filed a separate civil lawsuit seeking penalties and temporary and permanent injunctions.

The lawsuit accused Rojas and the clinics of violating the Texas Human Life Protection Act and the Texas Medical Practice Act. The Center for Reproductive Rights represents Rojas in the civil case. “The state of Texas has no case. Maria Rojas has been an upstanding midwife who delivered babies and provided lawful care for underserved pregnant patients,” Jenna Hudson, senior counsel at the Center for Reproductive Rights, said in a statement.

The organization said Rojas gave up the leases to the clinic locations after the injunction. The Center for Reproductive Rights stated that the clinics largely served low-income, uninsured and primarily Spanish-speaking patients. One location included a birthing center where Rojas delivered babies, according to the organization.

“It will now be nearly impossible to re-open these clinics,” Hudson said. “Maria Rojas deserves justice, and we will keep fighting,” she said. Rojas’ midwifery license remains suspended, according to her attorneys.

The ruling applies only to the temporary injunction in the state’s civil lawsuit. The indictment includes counts accusing Rojas of violating the Texas Medical Practice Act and causing financial harm to patients. The new indictment replaced an earlier case.

Rojas has pleaded not guilty. Rojas is the first person criminally charged under Texas’ near-total abortion ban since it took effect following the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision overturning Roe v. Wade.