Washington, D.C. – The Supreme Court granted Idaho the ability to enforce provisions of a stringent new abortion ban on Friday. The ban includes penalties for doctors who perform the procedure in emergency situations. The court’s decision came in response to emergency requests filed by Idaho state officials, who sought to put on hold a federal judge’s ruling that found the provisions to be in conflict with federal law. In addition, the court announced that it will hear oral arguments on the issue in April and issue a ruling by the end of June.
This latest development comes as other provisions of the near-total abortion ban have already gone into effect. The law, known as the Defense of Life Act, was enacted in 2020 with a provision stating that it would become effective if the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 ruling that recognized a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy. With the Supreme Court’s decision in 2022 to roll back the constitutional guarantee of abortion rights, the law was activated.
Under the Defense of Life Act, anyone who performs an abortion can face criminal penalties, including up to five years in prison. Additionally, healthcare professionals found to have violated the law may lose their professional licenses. However, there is an exception if the abortion is deemed necessary to protect the life of the pregnant woman.
The federal government had previously sued Idaho, leading to a federal judge blocking the state from enforcing provisions of the law related to emergency medical care required under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA). This act mandates appropriate emergency room care for patients, including pregnant women with serious complications, in hospitals that receive federal funding through the Medicare program.
In response to the federal judge’s ruling, the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals briefly put the decision on hold but ultimately allowed it to go back into effect, prompting Idaho state officials to turn to the Supreme Court. The state argued that the two laws are not in conflict since the federal law does not explicitly require doctors to perform abortions in certain circumstances. However, Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, representing the Biden administration, disagreed, stating that the Idaho law “criminalizes care required by federal law.”
This decision from the Supreme Court comes on the heels of a ruling by the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in favor of Texas in a similar case where the state sought to enforce strict abortion restrictions.
In conclusion, the Supreme Court’s recent decision to allow Idaho to enforce provisions of its strict abortion ban marks another significant development in the ongoing battle over reproductive rights in the United States. It sets the stage for further debate and legal challenges as the court prepares to hear oral arguments on the issue in the coming months. The ruling, expected by the end of June, will undoubtedly have far-reaching implications for the future of abortion access in America.