One Scene COMPLETELY Ruins This Fine Film (SPOILERS)

Not petty at all, we come here to read others opinions.
Her comments regarding compensation were odd....there is no financial compensation in criminal court.

All factually correct (maybe).
And why would Martha be allowed inside the dark room while the pictures of her daughter are being developed?
And why would her husband even take analog pictures in the first place, in a world where airpods exist (Martha has them on in the jogging sequence)?
Could it be because the goal of art is to attain "truth" (or at least some small part of the truth) about the nature of existence and human experience, and that this isn't the same as conveying facts or depicting objective reality?
Otherwise, why would anyone still paint anything, in a world where photographs exist? Because sometimes facts can get in the way of the truth, is why.

I agree on the moment that you mention in the OP but the first scene that really irritated me was when Burstyn offered LaBeouf the cheque to get out of her daughter’s life. Such a groaningly cliched moment, and a lazy way to conclude his character arc.

I’m less favourable than you to the film as a whole. It’s very well-acted, and the first act is incredibly harrowing, of course, but I found much of what followed routine, if always watchable.

I think the acting was very good in this movie but they blew it on a lot of things. That courtroom speech was one.

BTW, I don't think that Martha's look at the photograph told her anything about the midwife's intent. I think she saw the love in her own face for her infant and she realized that nothing the court did was going to bring that back, but at least she had that moment of love to hold onto.