A doctor who testified yesterday in one of three simultaneous trials challenging the congressional ban on partial birth abortions proclaimed he would probably continue performing the prohibited procedure and risk a jail sentence rather than obey the ban.

Dr. William Fitzhugh of Richmond, Va., said during the Nebraska trial that began Monday, "I'd have to take my chances," according to an Associated Press report.

As WorldNetDaily reported last week, opponents of the government's ban on partial birth abortion are challenging the legislation in New York, Nebraska and San Francisco. All three trials began Monday.

Late last year, U.S. District Judge Richard Kopf of Nebraska issued a restraining order blocking enforcement of the federal ban, expressing concerns that the law did not include an exception for preserving the health of the mother. This legal concern, in turn, has formed the basis of the three challenges that started to unfold this week.

But Anthony Coppolino, representing the U.S. Justice Department, emphasized Monday that Congress relied on recognized experts in drawing up the legislation.

"There are no material health conditions that require this procedure," Coppolino told the judge, according to AP. In fact, Congress' position is that a partial birth abortion is never necessary to preserve the health of a woman and is outside the standard of medical care, the report added.

The partial birth abortion ban, signed into law last November by President Bush, prescribes a maximum two-year prison sentence for doctors found guilty of performing the outlawed procedure. However, it has not been enforced pending the outcome of the legal challenges.

The Center for Reproductive Rights, along with abortion provider Dr. LeRoy Carhart, Fitzhugh and two other doctors, filed the lawsuit that led to the Nebraska trial. The National Abortion Federation and several doctors initiated the New York challenge, while the San Francisco action was brought by Planned Parenthood Federation of America and others.

Opponents of the congressional ban – the first time since the Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that an entire class of abortions has been outlawed – cite legal precedents favoring their position and hope the three courts will follow them.

"Five courts of appeal have said that [the laws] must include an exception for the health of the mother," Priscilla Smith, attorney for Carhart and the plaintiffs, told Kopf, according to the Chicago Tribune.

Since there are many different procedures for performing abortions, Smith told the judge, the physician's judgment is necessary for determining the best procedure, the Tribune reported. Thus, she argued, Congress should not be allowed to legislate such a sweeping ban.

"Enforcement of the act would limit my ability to care for those women," claimed Fitzhugh, according to the Associated Press account.

In the New York trial, plaintiffs' attorney A. Stephen Hut Jr. warned U.S. District Judge Richard C. Casey that graphic descriptions of partial birth abortion might add "an element of emotion," reported AP.

"It is the nature of this procedure itself that gives discomfort," countered Assistant U.S. Attorney Sean H. Lane.

Related story:

3 trials challenging abortion ban to begin