In a rapid-moving dispute that began with a 20-week anatomy scan, a newborn diagnosed with hypoplastic left heart syndrome (HLHS) became the center of a legal tug-of-war between an Alaskan surrogate and a California couple. The infant, named Rumi by his biological parents, was born in Dallas on August 12, 2026. After weeks of courtroom battles, the Texas Supreme Court issued a Thursday order authorizing his transfer to a Los Angeles hospital, overturning an earlier California judgment that had granted the commissioning parents full custody.
Legal showdown: Texas, California and the U.S. Supreme Court
The conflict escalated when the Los Angeles Superior Court declared that the surrogate, McKenna West had consented to the court’s jurisdiction and entered an ex parte parentage judgment in favor of the biological parents, Nausheen Gilkar and Omar Ahmed. Texas courts subsequently gave full faith and credit to that ruling, dismissing West from the Texas proceeding with prejudice. Seeking to halt the decision, West’s counsel filed an emergency petition before U.S. Supreme Court Circuit Justice Elena Kagan arguing that the California court violated federal due-process rights by treating a jurisdictional objection as consent.
West’s petition also warned that, without an immediate stay, the infant could be removed from Texas to a hospice setting in California, effectively ending life-saving treatment. The filing cited a claim—later refuted by the parents’ attorneys—that Gilkar and Ahmed intended to place the child in end-of-life care. “There is simply no truth whatsoever” to the hospice allegation, the parents’ lawyers wrote. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton intervened, emphasizing the child’s medical needs and urging the courts to prioritize treatment over custody disputes. The Thursday order from the Texas Supreme Court reflected this stance, stating, “Sustaining the life of the medically fragile child is the paramount concern in this time-sensitive matter.”
