Idaho's strict abortion ban faces scrutiny in federal appeals court
hearing
Send a link to a friend
[December 10, 2024]
By REBECCA BOONE
BOISE, Idaho (AP) — A federal appeals court is expected to hear
arguments Tuesday afternoon over whether Idaho should be prohibited from
enforcing a strict abortion ban during medical emergencies when a
pregnant patient's life or health is at risk.
The state law makes it a felony to perform an abortion unless the
procedure is necessary to prevent the death of the patient. President
Biden’s administration sued Idaho two years ago, contending the law
violates a federal rule called the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor
Act, or EMTALA, because it prevents doctors from performing abortions
that save their patients from serious infections, organ loss or other
major medical issues.
The U.S. Supreme Court heard the case earlier this year, but bounced it
back to the lower court on a procedural issue, leaving unanswered
questions about the legality of the state abortion ban.
Idaho officials have argued in court filings that the state abortion ban
doesn’t violate EMTALA. Instead, they say the fetus or embryo should be
considered a patient with protections under EMTALA as well. They also
argue that doctors have enough wiggle room under the law to use their
best judgment about when to treat pregnant people with life-threatening
medical conditions.
“Taking EMTALA for what it actually says, there is no direct conflict
with Idaho’s Defense of Life Act,” attorneys representing the Idaho
Legislature wrote in court filings earlier this month. “Nothing in
EMTALA requires physicians to violate state law. And nothing in Idaho
law — whether in EMTALA-covered circumstances or beyond — denies medical
care to pregnant women.”
About 50,000 people in the U.S. develop life-threatening complications
during pregnancy each year. Those complications can include major blood
loss, sepsis, or the loss of reproductive organs. In rare cases, doctors
might need to terminate a pregnancy to protect the health of the
pregnant person, especially in cases where there is no chance for a
fetus to survive.
[to top of second column]
|
People march through 8th Street in downtown Boise, Idaho, on May 3,
2022, in response to the news that the U.S. Supreme Court could be
poised to overturn the landmark Roe v. Wade case that legalized
abortion nationwide. (Sarah A. Miller/Idaho Statesman via AP, File)
But some state abortion bans have
made medical decisions that once seemed clear feel particularly
fraught for emergency room physicians. Complaints that pregnant
patients were turned away from U.S. emergency rooms spiked in 2022
after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.
“These harms are not hypothetical,” Idaho's largest hospital system,
St. Luke's Health System, wrote in a friend-of-the-court brief in
October. “In all of 2023, before Idaho's law went into effect, only
one pregnant patient presenting to St. Luke’s with a medical
emergency was airlifted out of state for care. Yet in the few months
when Idaho’s new abortion law was in effect, six pregnant St. Luke’s
patients with medical emergencies were transferred out of state for
termination of their pregnancy.”
One of those patients had severe preeclampsia — a condition that
causes dangerously high blood pressure that can be fatal if
untreated — and the others had premature rupture of their membranes,
putting them at risk of life-threatening infections, St. Luke's
said.
“The stakes could not be higher,” ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project
Deputy Director Alexa Kolbi-Molinas said Monday. She noted recent
news reports in Texas about women who died after being denied
appropriate treatments for incomplete miscarriages. “The reality is,
exceptions don't work. They don't actually protect the health and
rights of pregnant people regardless of what is written on the page,
and that is just the reality when you threaten physicians with
criminal penalties.”
All contents © copyright 2024 Associated Press. All rights reserved |