U.S. judge blocks Idaho abortion ban in emergencies; Texas restrictions
allowed
Send a link to a friend
[August 25, 2022]
By Nate Raymond
(Reuters) -A federal judge on Wednesday
blocked Idaho from enforcing a ban on abortions when pregnant women
require emergency care, a day after a judge in Texas ruled against
President Joe Biden's administration on the same issue.
The conflicting rulings came in two of the first lawsuits over Biden's
attempts to keep abortion legal after the conservative majority U.S.
Supreme Court in June overturned the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that
legalized the procedure nationwide.
Legal experts said the dueling rulings in Idaho and Texas could, if
upheld on appeal, force the Supreme Court to wade back into the debate.
About half of U.S. states have or are expected to seek to ban or curtail
abortions following Roe's reversal. Those states include Idaho and
Texas, which like 11 others adopted "trigger" laws banning abortion upon
such a decision.
Abortion is already illegal in Texas under a separate, nearly
century-old abortion ban that took effect after the U.S. Supreme Court's
decision. Idaho's trigger ban takes effect on Thursday, the same day as
in Texas and Tennessee.
In Idaho, U.S. District Judge B. Lynn Winmill agreed with the U.S.
Department of Justice that the abortion ban taking effect Thursday
conflicts with a federal law that ensures patients can receive emergency
"stabilizing care."
Winmill, who was appointed to the court by former Democratic President
Bill Clinton, issued a preliminary injunction blocking Idaho from
enforcing its ban to the extent it conflicts with federal law, citing
the threat to patients.
"One cannot imagine the anxiety and fear (a pregnant woman) will
experience if her doctors feel hobbled by an Idaho law that does not
allow them to provide the medical care necessary to preserve her health
and life," Winmill wrote.
The Justice Department has said the federal Emergency Medical Treatment
and Labor Act requires abortion care in emergency situations.
"Today's decision by the District Court for the District of Idaho
ensures that women in the State of Idaho can obtain the emergency
medical treatment to which they are entitled under federal law," U.S.
Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a written statement.
"The Department of Justice will continue to use every tool at its
disposal to defend the reproductive rights protected by federal law,"
Garland said. The DOJ has said that it disagrees with the Texas ruling
and is considering next legal steps.
[to top of second column]
|
Abortion rights protesters participate
in nationwide demonstrations following the leaked Supreme Court
opinion suggesting the possibility of overturning the Roe v. Wade
abortion rights decision, in Houston, Texas, U.S., May 14, 2022.
REUTERS/Callaghan O'Hare
U.S. District Judge James Wesley
Hendrix ruled in the Texas case that the U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services went too far by issuing guidance that the same
federal law guaranteed abortion care.
Hendrix agreed with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, a Republican,
that the guidance issued in July "discards the requirement to
consider the welfare of unborn children when determining how to
stabilize a pregnant woman."
Hendrix, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, said the
federal statute was silent as to what a doctor should do when there
is a conflict between the health of the mother and the unborn child
and that the Texas law "fills that void."
Hendrix issued an injunction barring enforcement of the HHS guidance
in Texas and against two groups of anti-abortion doctors who also
challenged it, saying the Idaho case showed a risk the Biden
administration might try to enforce it.
Hendrix declined to issue a nationwide injunction as Paxton wanted.
Appeals are expected in both cases and would be heard by separate
appeals courts, one based in San Francisco with a reputation for
leaning liberal and another in New Orleans known for conservative
rulings.
Greer Donley, an assistant professor at the University of Pittsburgh
Law School and expert on abortion law, said that if the conflicting
rulings were upheld the U.S. Supreme Court may feel pressured to
intervene.
"Without a federal right abortion, this is the type of legal chaos
that most people were predicting would be happening," she said.
(Reporting by Nate Raymond in Boston; Additional reporting by Dan
Whitcomb in Los Angeles; Editing by Grant McCool and Christopher
Cushing)
[© 2022 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content.
|