US Supreme Court to rule on Idaho's strict abortion ban in medical
emergencies
Send a link to a friend
[January 06, 2024]
By John Kruzel
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday let Idaho enforce
its near-total abortion ban in medical-emergency situations while also
agreeing to hear the fight between state officials and President Joe
Biden's administration over the legality of the Republican-backed
measure.
The justices granted a request by Idaho officials to temporarily lift a
federal judge's ruling that blocked the state's abortion measure after
concluding it must yield to a federal law that ensures that patients can
receive emergency "stabilizing care."
The case tees up another showdown over abortion access, coming after the
Supreme Court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, in June 2022
overturned the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that had legalized
abortion nationwide. Arguments in the Idaho case are expected in April,
with a ruling by the end of June.
Biden said the Supreme Court order to let Idaho enforce its strict
abortion ban "denies women critical emergency abortion care required by
federal law."
"These bans are also forcing doctors to leave Idaho and other states
because of laws that interfere with their ability to care for their
patients," Biden said in a statement released by the White House.
The justices in the coming months also are scheduled to hear another
major case on reproductive rights involving the Biden administration's
bid to preserve broad access to the abortion pill mifepristone.
Idaho officials in November urged the justices to pause U.S. District
Judge B. Lynn Winmill's August 2022 preliminary injunction issued after
he concluded that the abortion measure conflicted with a 1986 U.S. law
called the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, which requires
hospitals to "stabilize" patients with emergency medical conditions.
Idaho's Republican attorney general and top Republican state lawmakers
in court papers told the Supreme Court that Winmill's ruling had
permitted "an ongoing violation of both Idaho's sovereignty and its
traditional police power over medical practice."
Idaho was among the Republican-led states where new abortion
restrictions were introduced or took effect after the Supreme Court's
Roe reversal.
In Idaho, a so-called "trigger" law banning abortion that was passed by
the Republican-led state legislature and signed by a Republican governor
in 2020 automatically took effect upon Roe being overturned. Idaho's
law, known as the Defense of Life Act, bans all abortions except in
instances in which an abortion is found to be necessary to prevent the
mother's death.
[to top of second column]
|
The sun casts shadows as it rises over the U.S. Supreme Court in
Washington, U.S., December 20, 2023. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/File
Photo
Following Roe's demise, the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS) under Biden's direction issued federal guidance
stating that the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act takes
precedence over state abortion bans.
CHALLENGES TO IDAHO LAW
The Biden administration sued Idaho over its trigger law in August
2022, arguing that the measure conflicted with the 1986 law because
the federal statute could potentially require abortions that would
not be included under Idaho's narrow exception for saving the
mother's life.
Winmill that month agreed, blocking the Idaho law from being
enforced in cases of abortions needed to avoid putting the woman's
health in "serious jeopardy" or risking "serious impairment to
bodily functions."
A three-judge panel of the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit
Court of Appeals in September agreed to let Idaho enforce its ban
amid an appeal. But the full 9th Circuit later reversed the panel's
ruling, granting the Biden administration's request to block the
Idaho law while the appeal proceeds.
Abortion rights advocates have challenged the scope of abortion ban
exceptions in several states due to uncertainty, including among
physicians, about what medical emergencies during pregnancy would
permit health providers to perform the procedure.
The administration has waged a similar legal fight in Texas, where
U.S. District Judge James Wesley Hendrix blocked the federal
government from requiring healthcare providers to perform abortions
for emergency room patients when it would conflict with a
Republican-backed Texas abortion ban.
The New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Jan. 2
upheld that decision, ruling that the 1986 law "does not mandate any
specific type of medical treatment, let alone abortion." The 5th
Circuit's decision came a month after the top court in Texas ruled
against a woman who was seeking an emergency abortion of her
non-viable pregnancy.
(Reporting by John Kruzel; additional reporting by Kanishka SIngh;
Editing by Will Dunham and Cynthia Osterman)
[© 2023 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]This material
may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content.
|