The Supreme Court on Friday allowed the state of Idaho to enforce its abortion ban while considering whether doctors can legally use the procedure to stabilize a patient's condition.
A lower court has blocked a ban on hospital emergency abortions in Idaho after a lawsuit filed by the Biden administration argued that doctors must comply with the Emergency Medical Care and Affirmative Labor Act (EMTALA).
A 1986 federal law requires ER physicians to perform abortions when necessary as part of stabilizing treatment for emergency medical conditions.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services released guidance on the law two weeks after the Supreme Court reversed Roe v. Wade in 2022, and a month after the Biden administration sued Idaho.
“For certain medical emergencies, abortion therapy is a necessary stabilizing treatment,” Attorney General Elizabeth Preloger wrote in the Biden administration's filing with the Supreme Court.
Lower courts have reached conflicting decisions on whether states with near-total abortion bans can outlaw the procedure when necessary to stabilize a patient in an emergency room. There is.
U.S. District Judge B. Lynn Winmill in Idaho sided with the Biden administration, while in Texas, a panel of judges from the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that EMTALA does not force doctors to perform abortions.
“EMTALA does not mandate medical procedures, let alone abortion care, nor does it preempt Texas law,” a three-judge panel, all appointed by Republican presidents, concluded in the Texas lawsuit. did.
“We therefore decline to expand the scope of EMTALA,” the ruling states.
Idaho's abortion law punishes anyone who performs or facilitates an abortion with up to five years in prison. Exceptions are made in cases where the woman's life is in danger, or for victims of rape or incest.
The high court is scheduled to hear oral arguments in the case in April.
