Divided Supreme Court Justices Spar With Both Sides Over Emergency Abortion
Arguments were heard on conflicts between the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, or EMTALA, and Idaho's near-total abortion ban. The female Supreme Court justices strongly questioned the Idaho law, while the more conservative members of the bench floated three ways they could justify siding with Idaho over the Biden administration.
The Supreme Court heard nearly two hours of heated arguments Wednesday on the tension between Idaho鈥檚 near-total abortion ban and a federal law requiring hospitals to offer any treatment 鈥 including an abortion 鈥 needed to stabilize patients in an emergency. A few conservative justices at times joined the court鈥檚 liberal wing Wednesday in asking tough questions that picked apart Idaho鈥檚 argument that its hospitals should not be bound to provide abortions under the federal law at issue, known as the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, or EMTALA. But it was far from clear whether those conservatives 鈥 most notably Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett 鈥 were prepared to vote with the three liberals against Idaho. (Ollstein and Gerstein, 4/24)
The four female justices, including conservative Amy Coney Barrett, pushed back the hardest against Idaho鈥檚 assertion that its law, which prohibits doctors from performing an abortion except when a woman鈥檚 life is in danger, supersedes the federal emergency care statute known as EMTALA, or the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act. (Weixel, 4/24)
Members of the Court鈥檚 Republican majority proposed three possible ways they could try to justify a decision permitting Idaho to ban many medically necessary abortions. The weakest of these three arguments was proposed by Justice Samuel Alito, author of the Court鈥檚 2022 decision eliminating the constitutional right to an abortion. Alito pointed to a provision of EMTALA that requires hospitals to also offer stabilizing care to a pregnant patient鈥檚 鈥渦nborn child鈥 if a medical emergency threatens the fetus鈥檚 life, though Alito did not really make a legal argument. He just expressed indignation at the very idea that a statute that uses the words 鈥渦nborn child鈥 could possibly require abortions in any circumstances. (Millhiser, 4/24)
To prevail, the Biden administration will need the votes of two members of the court鈥檚 conservative bloc, and with Justice Brett Kavanaugh signaling sympathies toward Idaho, the case will likely come down to the votes of Chief Justice John Roberts and Amy Coney Barrett. The two justices had tough questions for both sides of the case. Here are the key takeaways from oral arguments. (Sneed and Fritze, 4/24)
Since Idaho鈥檚 strict abortion laws went into effect following the court鈥檚 repeal of Roe v. Wade in June 2022, they have faced numerous legal challenges. Several have been elevated to the Idaho Supreme Court, and others have risen to the U.S. District Court or 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. (Blanchard, 4/24)
Also 鈥
It was the news that every expectant mother dreads. Twelve weeks pregnant with her second child, Jennifer Adkins learned her developing fetus had Turner syndrome, a rare chromosomal abnormality, and was unlikely to survive. On top of that, doctors warned that her own health could be in jeopardy.聽(Gallagher and Jarrett, 4/24)