An Ada County judge will privately review data spreadsheets compiled by Boise State University researchers before ruling on whether the university must hand them over to an anti-abortion lobbying group. 

The Idaho Family Policy Center (IFPC) — a Christian lobbying group that helped write Idaho’s restrictive abortion laws — sued Boise State, alleging that it withheld public records related to a widely cited article co-authored by two researchers affiliated with the university. The article said that obstetrician-gynecologists fled Idaho after the state’s abortion ban took effect in 2022.

In December, IFPC filed a records request seeking “all documents” and “all data” related to the article, but Boise State only provided a single, two-page spreadsheet. In a July petition to Ada County’s district court, IFPC argued that the research “must have produced a paper trail longer than two pages.” 

IFPC’s petition asked the court to compel the university to hand over additional records, including emails along with documents from Boise State’s Institutional Review Board (IRB), which approved the researchers’ process for collecting data on human subjects.

District Judge Nancy Baskin heard arguments in the case Friday.

Carsten Peterson, an attorney at Hawley Troxell, represented Boise State. While Peterson acknowledged that additional records related to the article exist, including various other data sets, he argued that the university reviewed IFPC’s request “in good faith” and provided the only record that matched its request.

After asking the attorneys questions for more than an hour, Baskin ordered Boise State to show her any data files that the university deemed outside the scope of IFPC’s request. Baskin will review the spreadsheets “in-camera,” meaning behind closed doors, before she issues a written ruling on IFPC’s petition. 

Boise State has 10 days to deliver the spreadsheets to Baskin.

Article heavily cited in debate over abortion laws

The article, published last year by the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), reported that 35% of OB-GYNs left Idaho between 2022 and 2024 — after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, triggering Idaho’s abortion ban. 

Two researchers affiliated with Boise State — J. Edward McEachern, an adjunct faculty member and doctor at St. Luke’s, and Allen Traylor, a graduate student — co-authored the article with a doctor unaffiliated with the university. They conducted three “cross-sectional censuses” of OB-GYN physicians practicing obstetrics in Idaho to determine how many left the state after the U.S. Supreme Court decision. 

The article has been frequently cited in coverage detailing the effects of Idaho’s abortion ban, including by the New York Times last week, and by supporters of Proposition 1. The ballot measure would repeal the state’s abortion laws and allow the procedure up to fetal viability and beyond when there’s a medical emergency.

In the months leading up to the Nov. 3 election, IFPC has tried to discredit the article’s findings. Proposition 1 would repeal the civil enforcement law, Senate Bill 1309, that IFPC wrote. It gives family members of “preborn children” the right to sue a medical provider who performs an abortion. 

 “We’re now eleven days from the November election, and Prop 1 organizers and their boosters in the media are still using this flawed JAMA study to push the false narrative that OBGYNs are leaving our state because of our pro-life laws,” IFPC president Blain Conzatti said in a news release Friday. 

Boise State provides one spreadsheet used for article

IFPC’s public records request  asked for “all documents” and “all data” related to the “three cross sectional censuses” referenced in the JAMA article.

But Boise State provided just one spreadsheet, which came from Traylor, the graduate student.

Traylor, who co-authored the article while he was working on a broader dissertation on a related topic, “had produced multiple versions of the data for purposes of other research projects,” Peterson explained in a written argument prior to Friday’s hearing. “BSU determined that the information in the preliminary dataset in the custody of Mr. Traylor was likely what would be responsive” to IFPC’s request.

The request “sought to obtain the data underlying” the article, Peterson wrote. But it didn’t specify other records such as emails, IRB records or other spreadsheets that weren’t specifically used for the article. Boise State “reasonably construed” that the request sought data “related to, referenced in, and utilized” for the article, Peterson wrote.

Boise State suggested to IFPC that it could submit a new records request specifying the data it wanted, but the group didn’t do that before filing its lawsuit, Peterson said Friday. 

Isaac Helland, an attorney on IFPC’s legal team, countered that Boise State’s in-house attorney “concocted” a narrow interpretation of the records request so the university could “provide as few documents as possible.” 

Baskin didn’t tip her hand on how she’ll ultimately rule on the case. But her questions focused on what records exist related to the article, how Boise State interpreted IFPC’s request and who ultimately owns the records — the university or the researchers. 

When Peterson argued that IFPC should have been more specific about the records it wanted, Baskin said that members of the public often don’t know exactly what they’re looking for when they request public records.

Helland made a similar argument when Baskin asked him why IFPC didn’t file another records request before suing Boise State. He responded that there’s “informational asymmetry” between the government and the public. “It’s hard to ask for much more than all documents, all data,” he said.

Both sides react to hearing

Helland told Idaho Education News after Friday’s hearing that it “went well.” Baskin appeared to “recognize that Boise State’s interpretation was not the best reading” of IFPC’s request, he said. 

Stephany Galbreaith, Boise State’s director of media relations, said Friday that Boise State provided IFPC with “the responsive record in its custody,” and the university respects “the court’s ongoing review of this matter.”

“Boise State University applies a consistent process to public records requests, regardless of who submits them or the subject matter,” she said by email. “We review requests in good faith and provide responsive records in accordance with the Idaho Public Records Act.”

When EdNews previously reported on IFPC’s lawsuit, Galbreaith said that officials at Boise State “do not comment on pending litigation.”