The day after its decision was “inadvertently and briefly” posted online, the Supreme Court on Thursday upheld a block on portions of an Idaho abortion law after the Biden administration sued the state, claiming that the pro-life protections violated federal emergency medical treatment laws.
The court agreed to uphold a lower court ruling blocking Idaho’s “Defense of Life Act,” according to a decision officially published Thursday. Idaho’s law prohibits all abortions with exceptions if the mother’s life is in danger and punishes those who administer abortions with up to two to five years in prison.
In the 6-3 decision, the majority declined to rule on the merits of the whole law but wrote that litigation on the law should continue on the lower level while allowing a block on parts of the law to go back into effect. Justice Elena Kagan wrote in the decision to uphold a lower court’s ruling that “will prevent Idaho from enforcing its abortion ban when the termination of a pregnancy is needed to prevent serious harms to a woman’s health.”
The case revolves around whether the Emergency Medical Treatment & Labor Act, known as EMTALA, conflicts with Idaho’s abortion ban.
Previously, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit said that federal rules requiring emergency medical treatment applied to abortion situations. The Biden administration has argued that federal law would allow doctors to perform abortions in circumstances not allowed by state law.
Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Ketanji Brown Jackson, John Roberts, Amy Coney Barrett, and Brett Kavanaugh joined Kagan in the majority. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch dissented.
Alito argued that the court should have ruled on the broader issues of state abortion laws instead of deferring on procedural grounds.
“That question is as ripe for decision as it ever will be,” he wrote in the document. “Apparently, the court has simply lost the will to decide the easy but emotional and highly politicized question that the case presents. That is regrettable.”
Alito added that EMTALA “does not require hospitals to perform abortions in violation of Idaho law.”
CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP
Pro-life groups have argued that current federal law cannot be used to force emergency room doctors to perform abortions.
“Having delivered over 5,000 babies in my 30-year career, I’ve had the privilege to provide care for both of my patients, the mother and the unborn child,” Dr. Ingrid Skop with the Charlotte Lozier Institute said on Wednesday after the draft leaked. “Throughout my career, my ability to provide emergency care under EMTALA has always been clear and never obstructed. There is no conflict between EMTALA and pro-life state laws, as both allow quality care for mothers with pregnancy emergencies.”
Supreme Court public information officer Patricia McCabe said the court’s publications unit had “inadvertently and briefly uploaded a document to the Court’s website” on Wednesday that appeared similar to the final opinion announced on Thursday.
