SCOTUS Sheepishly Admits It Shouldn’t Have Taken Emergency Abortion Case
The embarrassing reversal — which was accidentally disclosed a day early when it was “inadvertently and briefly uploaded” to the Supreme Court’s website — plainly indicated a growing rift at the court: the three liberal justices, who see this case as a very simple one; three conservative justices — Barrett, Kavanaugh and Roberts — who appear suddenly conflicted about their role putting women’s health in jeopardy; and the ultra-conservative faction — Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch — who simply don’t care.
Read more at Rolling Stone
Supreme Court dismisses Idaho abortion challenge, allowing doctors to perform emergency abortions
Notably, EMTALA first came to light as a response to hospitals turning away uninsured pregnant people in active labor. Congress passed the law in 1986 and specifically included provisions mandating federally funded hospitals to accept a patient in active labor even if she doesn’t have insurance. President Ronald Reagan signed it into law. The purpose of EMTALA was to establish a nationwide baseline of emergency care that everyone is entitled to, regardless of where they live or their medical condition. Congress even included a preemption clause that said if any state law conflicts with EMTALA’s requirements, EMTALA overrides the state law.
Read more at Salon
US supreme court allows emergency abortions in Idaho for now
Although many states allow doctors to perform an emergency abortion when a woman’s life or health is at risk, in effect mirroring Emtala, Idaho only allowed doctors to intervene when a woman was on the brink of death, a much higher bar for intervention. The Biden administration sued Idaho to enforce the law.
Read more at The Guardian
Supreme Court dismisses Idaho case, allows abortions in medical emergencies
“If someone is having a crisis and part of the treatment involves an abortion — or any procedure or intervention that might be deemed an abortion by a prosecutor down the road — that is something we shouldn’t have to think about,” said Dr. Rob Davidson, a Michigan-based emergency physician, previously told The 19th. “When I have a pregnant woman having a crisis, my first call should be to an OB, and not a lawyer.
Read more at 19th News
In a scathing dissent, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson says Idaho abortion ruling is ‘not a victory for pregnant patients’
“And for as long as we refuse to declare what the law requires, pregnant patients in Idaho Texas, and elsewhere will be paying the price,” she continued. “Because we owe them — and the nation — an answer to the straightforward pre-emption question presented in these cases, I respectfully dissent.”
Read more at NBC News
Jackson Dings Court For Punting On Abortion Case When Idaho Is So Clearly Wrong
“Storm clouds loom ahead,” Jackson echoed.
Three justices, Alito, Gorsuch and Thomas, assert “that States have free rein to nullify federal law.” Three more, she wrote, refuse to disavow that position, only “murmuring” that petitioners have raised a weighty argument.
Read more at Talking Points Memo
Idaho must provide emergency abortions after Supreme Court declines to rule on case
“While this court dawdles and the country waits, pregnant people experiencing emergency medical conditions remain in a precarious position, as their doctors are kept in the dark about what the law requires,” Jackson warned.
Read more at Politico