BOISE, Idaho — In a packed Boise courtroom, Idaho attorney James Craig on Tuesday invoked macabre imagery of abortions as he defended the state’s near-total abortion ban. They’re “gruesome and barbaric medical procedures,” he said in his opening statement, and described the process as one that involves “tearing a baby apart limb from limb ... and crushing its skull to pull it out of the mother.”

The lawsuit against the state in the 4th Judicial District in Ada County was brought by several women and doctors who say the ban has harmed them. Craig said Idaho has an obligation to protect “unborn children” as he outlined the state’s case, much of which relied on the argument that the plaintiffs have no standing in the civil lawsuit. The case is being livestreamed online.

The grim and explicit argument is a different approach for attorneys representing the state, which has faced numerous lawsuits over abortion since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned national abortion protections in 2022, triggering Idaho laws that restricted the procedure.

The plaintiffs, who include four women who were denied abortions in Idaho and sought care elsewhere, offered hours of sometimes tearful testimony. Where Craig’s team asserts that Idaho abortion restrictions protect unborn children, the plaintiffs argue that the laws are enforced at the expense of Idaho women.

“The critical question is: Who should be able to receive abortions under the medical exceptions?” said Gail Deady, a senior attorney with the Center for Reproductive Rights and a member of the plaintiffs’ legal team, in her opening statement.

“Two years after the laws were passed, no one has offered an answer,” she said.

Testimony on out-of-state abortions prompts tears

Testimony began Tuesday with accounts from the four women who left Idaho to undergo abortion procedures. They’ve detailed their experiences publicly already, in court filings and firsthand to the Idaho Statesman, but their court testimony revealed additional details and shed light on heartrending decisions.

Jennifer Adkins, whose name appears first on the court case, was the first witness called. She described learning at a 12-week ultrasound that her baby, nicknamed “Spooky” for her Halloween due date, would not survive the pregnancy. What’s more, Adkins was at risk of developing life-threatening complications if she continued the pregnancy, she said in her testimony.

Through Adkins’ testimony, the state frequently objected to Deady’s line of questioning. Craig said details of Adkins’ pregnancy were irrelevant to the case. Frequently, Scott allowed Adkins to answer Deady’s questions in spite of the state’s objections.

Adkins said she was unable to get an abortion in Idaho so long as her baby had a heartbeat. She was devastated.

“No parent wants to wish that when they look at an ultrasound, they don’t see their baby’s heartbeat,” Adkins said. “But here I was wishing that I wouldn’t so the decision would be made for us and it would end her suffering.”

Jillaine St. Michel testified after Adkins about learning her baby had multiple severe anomalies that affected several different organ systems and would not survive the pregnancy. She began to cry on the stand as she described traveling days later for her abortion to Seattle, where she attended procedures alone while her husband stayed with their toddler at a nearby hotel.

“It was the worst four days of my life,” St. Michel said. “I can’t describe it any other way. Knowing I was carrying a pregnancy that was doomed, that had no chance of survival, each day was worse than the last.”

Kayla Smith then testified about her experience with severe preeclampsia in her first pregnancy. She became pregnant again in 2022 and was 19 weeks pregnant when an anatomy scan revealed her baby, named Brooks, had numerous structural heart defects. Smith said her family was willing to try every option, but they couldn’t find a pediatric cardiologist willing to operate on Brooks.

Smith said getting an abortion out of state took a huge toll on her. She took out a personal loan to pay for her procedure — which insurance would not cover — at the University of Washington. An employee there, unfamiliar with Smith’s circumstances, offered her congratulations on the birth of her son. She said undergoing the procedure in Idaho with a care team familiar with her situation would’ve saved her the pain of that interaction.

Brooks was born with a heartbeat, briefly, and an autopsy later revealed that his heart defects continued to worsen after the Smiths first learned of the issues.

Finally, Rebecca Vincen-Brown testified about her experience learning that her baby had triploidy, a rare genetic condition that typically results in miscarriage or death soon after birth. She traveled to Portland with her husband and toddler for an abortion. While there, she went into labor in her hotel room and delivered her baby in the bathroom while she tried to avoid waking her daughter in the next room.

Doctors weigh in on abortion ban as trial continues

Much of Tuesday and Wednesday’s testimony came from Dr. Emily Corrigan, an OBGYN at Saint Alphonsus Regional Medical Center in Boise. Corrigan, who is also a plaintiff in the case, testified as an expert witness about what abortion care looked like in Idaho before the procedure was banned and how laws have restricted her practice.

Corrigan testified for about eight hours, during which she described the kinds of medical conditions that could put a pregnant patient at serious medical risk — but not necessarily risk of death.

She said she has sought guidance from the state, other physicians and Saint Alphonsus to understand when an abortion is legal under Idaho’s narrow exceptions. Despite that, she said, the line is still unclear.

Lawyers for the state kept their cross-examination of Adkins, St. Michel, Smith and Vincen-Brown relatively brief in spite of numerous objections to questioning from the plaintiffs’ lawyers, but spent significant time cross-examining Corrigan.

At one point, Craig repeated his description of abortion — “tearing a baby limb from limb” — and asked Corrigan to confirm its accuracy. Her lawyers objected.

Other Idaho doctors, including Boise physician Dr. Loren Colson and Mountain Home physician Dr. Nichole Aker, testified Wednesday that they have had to delay patient care and deny treatment out of concern for breaking the law. Deady described the doctors’ situation as “perilous confusion” that forces health care professionals to flout their obligations and put patients at risk.

The trial will continue Thursday and reconvene on Nov. 19. It’s scheduled to conclude Nov. 21.

_____

©2024 The Idaho Statesman. Visit idahostatesman.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.