The US Supreme Court has agreed to review the issue of whether hospitals can perform abortions in life-threatening emergency situations, even in states with near-total bans.
The justices have agreed to hear arguments from Idaho officials who argue that the state should be able to enforce a law that prohibits all abortions except when necessary to save the life of the mother.
Without explanation, the court has allowed the law to take full effect, blocking a previous order that had allowed hospitals to perform the procedure in medical emergencies.
This case is one of the first tests of the Supreme Court’s stance on abortion since the 2022 ruling that overturned the constitutional right established in the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. The court is also considering the accessibility of a widely used abortion pill, and is reviewing a ruling that would restrict mail-order prescriptions and require in-person doctor visits.
The Supreme Court has announced that it will hear arguments on the Idaho dispute in April, with a ruling expected by late June. In an unusual move, the court has bypassed the federal appeals court level and has decided to directly review a federal trial judge’s ruling.
The Biden administration argues that the Idaho law must yield to a federal emergency-care law, which requires hospitals receiving Medicare funds to provide “necessary stabilizing treatment” to patients. The law, known as the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA), was designed to prevent private hospitals from turning away indigent patients.
A federal trial judge’s order in August 2022 had prohibited Idaho from enforcing its criminal ban on hospitals and doctors performing abortions to protect against serious health risks to the mother. Republican officials, including Idaho Attorney General Raul Labrador and House Speaker Mike Moyle, are challenging this order.
Lower courts have differed on this issue, with the New Orleans-based 5th Circuit rejecting similar arguments and allowing Texas to fully enforce its abortion ban.
The cases in question are Moyle v. United States, 23A469 and 23-726, and Idaho v. United States, 23A470 and 23-727.
(Updates with background on dispute.)
To contact the reporter on this story:
To contact the editors responsible for this story:
Elizabeth Wasserman at ewasserman2@bloomberg.net
Sara Forden
© 2024 Bloomberg L.P. All rights reserved. Used with permission.