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 D

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

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CIVIL ACTION
CASE NO. _______________

DECLARATION OF JESSICA KLIER IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT
JESSICA KLIER, declares under penalty of perjury that the following statements are true
and correct:
1.

I am the Administrator at Austin Women’s Health Center and Brookside

Women’s Medical Center, a position that I have held for 16 years. Along with the Medical
Director, I provide overall leadership for the clinic. My responsibilities include carrying out the
clinic’s organizational goals, developing and implementing clinic policies and procedures with
operational oversight of financial and budgetary activities, and ensuring compliance with all
regulatory agencies governing health care delivery.
2.

Austin Women’s Health Center is a licensed abortion facility and Brookside

Women’s Medical Center is a gynecological and primary care practice. Together, these two
facilities (collectively “Austin Women’s”) have provided high-quality reproductive services to
Texas women for over 40 years. Austin Women’s provides medication abortion up to 70 days of
gestation and procedural abortions (sometimes referred to as “surgical abortions”) up to 17
weeks, 6 days as dated from the first day of the patient’s last menstrual period (“LMP”). Austin
Women’s also provides contraception, miscarriage management, and gynecologic surgical
1

procedures, including colposcopies, biopsies, and loop electrosurgical excision procedures
(“LEEPs”), in which a layer of cervical tissue is removed to diagnose and treat cancer or
precancerous cells.
3.

I submit this declaration in support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment.

4.

The facts I state here are based on my experience, my review of Austin Women’s

business records, information obtained in the course of my duties at Austin Women’s, and
personal knowledge that I have acquired through my service at Austin Women’s.
5.

My understanding of Senate Bill 8 (“S.B. 8”) is that it prevents a physician from

performing an abortion if they can detect embryonic or fetal cardiac activity or if they have failed
to check for cardiac activity. I understand that any person may sue a physician who violates this
law and if they are successful, the physician is blocked from violating the law again, and must
pay a minimum of $10,000, as well as costs and attorney’s fees.
6.

I further understand that anyone who “aids or abets” in the performance of a

prohibited abortion, including clinics, can also be sued and would face the same penalties as the
physicians.
7.

Embryonic or fetal cardiac activity can generally be detected as early as six weeks

LMP. Therefore, S.B. 8 bans abortion in Texas after approximately six weeks LMP.
8.

If we continue providing abortions after six weeks LMP, the threat of lawsuits

will cause uncertainty and anxiety for Austin Women’s, its physicians, and staff. Our patients
will be burdened in their decision-making because their friends, family, and support networks
could be sued for allegedly “aiding and abetting” them in obtaining their abortions.

2

9.

I believe it is very likely that Austin Women’s, our physicians and/or staff

members will be sued by the anti-abortion individuals who are constantly threatening abortion
access in this state and who are opposed to our provision of abortion care.
10.

S.B. 8 is designed to prohibit the majority of abortion care we provide and put our

future at risk. Staff or physicians who are sued will be forced to defend themselves against
lawsuits that will be emotionally, logistically, and financially burdensome. I understand that they
may also face disciplinary action by the Texas Medical and Nursing Boards. We will not be able
to continue operating if our staff and physicians are prohibited from performing their jobs. Staff
have already come to me, concerned about their jobs, about our long-term sustainability, and
fearful for the repercussions S.B. 8 will have for them personally.
11.

It will also be devastating for the patients we serve if we cannot continue offering

abortions after six weeks LMP.
12.

For multiple reasons, ten percent or less of our patients obtain an abortion before

six weeks LMP. It is extremely difficult to arrange the necessary logistics and finances and
comply with the many burdensome Texas laws that the state has placed on abortion, all before
the patient reaches six weeks LMP.
13.

If these patients are prevented from getting abortion care in Texas, many will be

unable to access abortion at all. Those who are able to travel out of state will suffer increased
risks to their health by the delay in ending their pregnancies. Many will also face increased costs
related to abortion, as their abortion access is pushed to later gestational points when abortion is
more expensive and may require a two-day procedure, instead of one.
14.

I am all too familiar with laws like S.B. 8 that are intended to close clinics. While

later ruled unconstitutional, House Bill 2 of 2013 succeeded in closing down more than half of

3

the abortion clinics in Texas, including our sister clinic in Killeen. Our clinic in Killeen has
never reopened.
15.

I am worried for myself, my staff, the doctors I work with, and the patients we

serve. We have been providing high-quality medical care to patients in Texas for 40 years, under
constant threat from those who oppose the work we do. Yet I have never been more concerned
for our future than I am today.
16.

I also understand that S.B. 8 requires those who challenge abortion restrictions or

regulations in Texas to pay defendants’ costs and attorney’s fees for any claims they do not
succeed on.
17.

Austin Women’s has been involved in a number of lawsuits challenging Texas

abortion laws, including: In re Abbot, 954 F.3d 772 (5th Cir. 2020), cert. granted, judgment
vacated as moot by Planned Parenthood Ctr. for Choice v. Abbott, 141 S. Ct. 1261 (2021)
(mem.) (COVID abortion ban); Whole Woman’s Health v. Smith, 338 F. Supp. 3d 606 (W.D.
Tex. 2018), appeal docketed and argued, No. 18-50730 (5th Cir.) (requirement for interment or
cremation of embryonic and fetal tissue); Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, 136 S. Ct. 2292
(2016) (decision on admitting-privileges and ASC requirements); and Planned Parenthood of
Greater Tex. Surgical Health Servs. v. Abbott, 748 F.3d 583 (5th Cir. 2014), reh’rg en banc
denied, 769 F.3d 330 (5th Cir. 2014) (decision on admitting-privileges, medication-abortion
regulations).
18.

Austin Women’s has stayed open because of litigation we have brought against

unconstitutional laws. If we are required to pay for defendants’ costs and attorney’s fees when
we do not succeed on every claim we bring, even if we obtain our desired relief, this will make it

4

more difficult for us to bring cases and certain claims that are necessary to protect our patients’
constitutional rights.

5

6