Whole Woman's Health et al v. Jackson et al

Filing 19

MOTION for Summary Judgment and Memorandum of Law in Support by Alamo Women's Reproductive Services, Alamo City Surgery Center PLLC, Brookside Women's Medical Center PA, Erika Forbes, Frontera Fund, Fund Texas Choice, Allison Gilbert, Houston Women's Clinic, Houston Women's Reproductive Services, Jane's Due Process, Daniel Kanter, Bhavik Kumar, Lilith Fund, Inc., North Texas Equal Access Fund, Planned Parenthood Center for Choice, Planned Parenthood South Texas Surgical Center, Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas Surgical Health Services, Marva Sadler, Southwestern Women's Surgery Center, The Afiya Center, Whole Woman's Health, Whole Women's Health Alliance. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A. Gilbert Declaration, #2 Exhibit B. Kumar Declaration, #3 Exhibit C. Ferrigno Declaration, #4 Exhibit D. Klier Declaration, #5 Exhibit E. Lambrecht Declaration, #6 Exhibit F. Linton Declaration, #7 Exhibit G. Hagstrom Miller Declaration, #8 Exhibit H. Braid Declaration, #9 Exhibit I. Rosenfeld Declaration, #10 Exhibit J. Barraza Declaration, #11 Exhibit K. Sadler Declarationb, #12 Exhibit L. Zamora Declaration, #13 Exhibit M. Jones Declaration, #14 Exhibit N. Rupani Declaration, #15 Exhibit O. Connor Declaration, #16 Exhibit P. Williams Declaration, #17 Exhibit Q. Kanter Declaration, #18 Exhibit R. Forbes Declaration, #19 Exhibit S. Mariappuram Declaration)(Hebert, Christen)

Exhibit S

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AUSTIN DIVISION
WHOLE WOMAN’S HEALTH, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.

Civil Action No. __________

AUSTIN REEVE JACKSON, et al., et al.,
Defendants.
DECLARATION OF ROSANN MARIAPPURAM IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I, Rosann Mariappuram, declare as follows:
1.

I am the Executive Director of Jane’s Due Process, Inc., a nonprofit corporation

incorporated in Texas and based in Austin, that helps young people navigate parental consent laws
and confidentially access abortion and contraception care in Texas. This includes providing funds
to Texas abortion providers on behalf of abortion patients in the state to subsidize the cost of their
care.
2.

Our mission is to help ensure that young people in Texas have full reproductive

freedom and autonomy over their healthcare decisions.
3.

As Executive Director, my primary responsibilities are overseeing the daily

operations of the organization, including its programmatic work; helping ensure the financial
health of the organization, including fundraising; managing staff; and serving as a liaison to our
Board of Directors.
4.

I bring to this position experience as an attorney and advocate for abortion,

miscarriage and contraceptive care access. I previously served on the Boards of Directors for the
Lilith Fund for Reproductive Equity and NARAL Pro-Choice Texas.

5.

I provide the following testimony based on personal knowledge acquired through

my service at Jane’s Due Process, including consultation with staff and Board members and review
of the organization’s business records.
Jane’s Due Process Services
6.

Jane’s Due Process currently employs five full-time staff members and nearly 100

volunteers, and we serve young people throughout Texas. Under state law, an abortion provider
must obtain the written consent of a parent or guardian before providing abortion care to a minor.
Without parental consent, a minor’s only recourse is to petition a court for a bypass of the
requirement. Jane’s Due Process operates a hotline through which young people can request
assistance with the judicial bypass process. Specifically, we connect young people to a network of
volunteer attorneys who we have recruited and trained to provide free legal representation to
minors in judicial bypass proceedings.
7.

Jane’s Due provides case management services, which includes providing

emotional support and making referrals to housing, education, childcare, and other social services.
8.

Jane’s Due Process completes about thirty hotline intakes for judicial bypass

assistance per month. Roughly half of these clients complete the bypass process.
9.

In addition to facilitating abortion access for young people who are unable to obtain

parental consent, Jane’s Due Process provides funds to abortion providers in Texas on behalf of
young patients in the state to subsidize the cost of their care. Occasionally, we also refer young
people to abortion providers in Texas, secure the abortion appointments for them, and train
abortion providers on how to navigate Texas laws and regulations governing minors’ abortion
access.

2

10.

Lastly, Jane’s Due Process educates young people in Texas about contraceptive and

abortion access, including the judicial bypass process, through educational events and social
media.
11.

Jane’s Due Process provides these services to young people seeking abortion care

in Texas to express and effectuate its deeply held belief in young people’s equal rights to bodily
autonomy and dignity.
Jane’s Due Process Clients
12.

Almost all our clients obtain an ultrasound dating their pregnancy before their

bypass hearing because the legal requirements to be granted a bypass require them to be well
informed about their decision, thus judges expect young people to have obtained counseling about
the benefits, risks, and alternatives of an abortion before the bypass hearing. I cannot think of a
single client who was less than six weeks pregnant when their pregnancy was dated.
13.

Most young people involve a parent or guardian in their abortion decision if it is

safe for them to do so. Jane’s Due Process serves those who cannot. Our clients have parents or
guardians who are deceased, incarcerated, or abusive; who are inclined to kick them out upon
learning of their pregnancy or plans for an abortion; or who would try to coerce them to carry to
term, for example.
14.

Many of our clients experience multiple, intersecting forms of oppression. The vast

majority are people of color: 50% identify as Latino/Hispanic and 24% identify as Black. Indeed,
the majority of Texas abortion patients identify as Black or Latina—communities that already face
inequities in access to medical care. Additionally, many of our clients live under the poverty line.
Thus, they are unable to absorb an unforeseen medical expense—not to mention the costs of

3

traveling to one of the few abortion providers left in Texas, including transportation, lodging, and
childcare.
15.

Our clients also face unique barriers to abortion access as young people. The

process of seeking a judicial bypass delays their abortion care by approximately ten days, which
raises the costs of the abortion. Further, it is extremely difficult for young people to explain an
extended absence from school or home caused by the judicial bypass hearing and abortion
appointment. Such absences threaten the confidentiality surrounding their pregnancy and plans for
an abortion. Confidentiality is especially important for our clients because of the unsupportive,
and sometimes abusive environments they live in.
Impact of SB 8 on Jane’s Due Process and Its Clients
16.

I understand that Texas Senate Bill 8 (“SB 8”), which is scheduled to take effect on

September 1, 2021, would ban the provision of abortions at approximately six weeks of pregnancy,
prohibit aiding or abetting such abortions, and prohibit intending to aid or abet such abortions. I
also understand SB 8 to enable private parties to sue individuals and entities who engage in such
activities for a minimum of $10,000 per abortion performed in violation of the ban.
17.

If SB 8 prevents Texas abortion providers from offering abortion care after six

weeks’ gestational age, our clients will no longer be able to obtain an abortion in Texas. As a
result, while they will no longer need to petition for a judicial bypass in Texas, our clients will
have no choice but to travel out of state for abortion care. Because they are unable to be absent
from school or home for an extended period without compromising their confidentiality and safety,
our clients will largely be unable to obtain an abortion outside of Texas—or at all. Thus, efforts
by Jane’s Due Process to divert its resources to out-of-state travel and to educate young people
about out-of-state providers will be inadequate.

4

18.

This is precisely what happened when Texas sharply curtailed abortion access at

the start of the COVID-19 pandemic last year. Patients throughout Texas were delayed in accessing
abortion and had to travel much longer distances to reach a provider legally authorized to perform
abortions. Consequently, only a third of the young people who sought our help were able to obtain
abortion care, all outside of Texas. Many young people we worked with reported that leaving the
state was simply not an option for them.
19.

SB 8 is unconstitutional and therefore invalid. But if it takes effect, I expect

individuals or organizations opposed to abortion access to sue Jane’s Due process for facilitating
minors’ abortion care after six weeks of pregnancy. We have already been targeted for our efforts
to ensure that young people who are unable or to obtain parental consent can nevertheless terminate
a pregnancy. Individuals who identify as “pro-life” have sent disparaging emails and letters to our
staff, attempted to disrupt our tabling activities, and threatened our volunteer attorneys. And last
year, a former Austin City Council member sued the City of Austin for allocating funds to the
Austin Public Health department to provide abortion support services. After a competitive bid
process, Jane’s Due Process was awarded a contract to provide these services and to carry out its
mission. The City of Austin has been sued three additional times over this funding and contract,
and each time Jane’s Due Process has been served with third-party subpoenas regarding the
lawsuits.
20.

Lawsuits filed pursuant to SB 8 against Jane’s Due Process would impair our ability

to serve our clients because we lack the resources to defend against the suits. This is true even if
we were to divert our limited staff time and organizational funds to doing so. Although we work
with local attorneys regarding judicial bypass proceedings, we have been unable to secure
commitments from any attorneys to represent us on a pro bono basis if we are sued under SB 8.

5

Moreover, the unlimited liability associated with lawsuits filed under SB 8 threatens to deplete our
resources.
21.

By preventing us from helping young people exercise their fundamental right to

abortion access and forcing us to shift our resources to out-of-state travel they generally cannot
pursue, SB 8 would frustrate the mission of Jane’s Due Process.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746, I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true
and correct.
Dated: July 12, 2021

Rosann Mariappuram

6