Texas abortion bans challenged in dramatic court docket testimony from 3 ladies : Pictures

Samantha Casiano advised a Texas courtroom that she ought to have been in a position to let her daughter, who had anencephaly, “go to relaxation sooner.”

Danielle Villasana for NPR

disguise caption

toggle caption

Danielle Villasana for NPR

Samantha Casiano advised a Texas courtroom that she ought to have been in a position to let her daughter, who had anencephaly, “go to relaxation sooner.”

Danielle Villasana for NPR

AUSTIN, Texas – Samantha Casiano, who gave start to a child who lived simply 4 hours, broke down and have become bodily in poor health on the witness stand as she advised the story of her doomed being pregnant in an Austin, Texas, courtroom on Wednesday. Her husband, Luis Villasana, rushed to the entrance of the courtroom to assist her, throughout a listening to in a case difficult the abortion bans in Texas.

Casiano was one in every of three ladies who gave dramatic testimony about their pregnancies within the case introduced by the Middle for Reproductive Rights. The case, on behalf of 13 sufferers and two docs, argues that the medical exceptions to Texas’ legal guidelines are unclear and unworkable for docs in ways in which hurt sufferers and that the state has carried out nothing to make clear its legal guidelines.

In Wednesday’s continuing, which is able to proceed on Thursday, legal professionals for Casiano and the opposite plaintiffs requested the decide to quickly droop the bans for individuals who have medical problems of their pregnancies because the case proceeds. State Lawyer Common Ken Paxton’s workplace is asking for the case to be dismissed.

The benches within the roomy, model new courtroom on the Travis County Civil District Courtroom had been full of reporters, plaintiffs, and their supporters, together with a number of husbands. Members of the anti-abortion rights group Texas Alliance for Life had been additionally in attendance.

Eight attorneys represented the sufferers and docs difficult the legislation. On the opposite aspect of the room, two attorneys represented defendant Texas Lawyer Common Ken Paxton. Choose Jessica Mangrum, elected as a Democratic judicial candidate in 2020, presided.

Throughout hours of emotional testimony, the courtroom felt tense and quiet. Casiano, who first advised her story to NPR in April, was so overcome as she described her experiences she cried, coughed, choked after which vomited within the witness field. The court docket was adjourned for a recess at that time.

When it was again in session, Casiano described what it was like to present start to the daughter they named Halo. “She was gasping for air,” Casiano stated. “I simply stored telling myself and my child that I am so sorry that this has occurred to you. I felt so dangerous. She had no mercy. There was no mercy there for her.”

Individuals within the courtroom wept as Casiano spoke.

The opposite ladies with sophisticated pregnancies who testified had been Amanda Zurawski and Ashley Brandt. Brandt was in a position to journey out of Texas to obtain a selective discount for a twin whose cranium had not developed correctly. Zurawski’s water broke too early, however she was denied induction or abortion. She went into septic shock and was within the intensive care unit for 3 days.

Amanda Zurawski speaks throughout a press convention exterior the Travis County Courthouse on July 19, 2023 in Austin, Texas.

SUZANNE CORDEIRO/AFP by way of Getty Photographs

disguise caption

toggle caption

SUZANNE CORDEIRO/AFP by way of Getty Photographs

Amanda Zurawski speaks throughout a press convention exterior the Travis County Courthouse on July 19, 2023 in Austin, Texas.

SUZANNE CORDEIRO/AFP by way of Getty Photographs

Lawyer Amy Pletscher, representing Paxton’s workplace, objected often as the ladies described their experiences with being pregnant problems that had been left untreated in Texas. She argued that it was not related to debate previous medical historical past, however the decide allowed the testimony to proceed. Pletscher additionally requested every affected person witness if Lawyer Common Ken Paxton had personally denied them an abortion. Every stated no.

Molly Duane, the legal professional for the Middle for Reproductive Rights, attacked the defendant’s arguments, specified by a court docket submitting in June, that not one of the affected person plaintiffs have standing. Within the doc, the state argued that their previous hurt is the fault of the ladies’s docs and their future hurt — akin to harm to their reproductive well being — is hypothetical.

Duane countered: “Does the state assume that the one one who would have standing to problem an abortion legislation is a lady who involves court docket with amniotic fluid or blood dripping down her leg?”

The ultimate witness who testified Wednesday was Dr. Damla Karsan, one of many doctor plaintiffs within the lawsuit. She described the case of a affected person whose fetus had a deadly situation who needed to drive 14 hours to get an abortion out of state. “I really feel like my arms are tied – I’ve the coaching, the talent, the expertise, even the amenities to offer the care, and I am unable to offer that care and it is – it is intestine wrenching,” Karsan testified.

Attorneys for Texas had been particularly aggressive in cross-examining Karsan. Lawyer Jonathan Stone repeatedly questioned whether or not she was conversant in the exception language in Texas legislation previous to the present legal guidelines. He additionally questioned her about varied insurance policies of the hospitals the place she works. In its June submitting, the attorneys for Paxton’s workplace referred to Karsan as an “abortionist” slightly than a doctor or OB-GYN.

In a press convention after the listening to adjourned, plaintiff Amanda Zurawski stated she was shocked by the callousness of her cross-examination. “I survived sepsis and I do not assume at present was a lot much less traumatic than that,” she stated.

The listening to continues for a full day on Thursday. After it concludes, Choose Mangrum might rule on the momentary injunction and movement to dismiss at any time.