The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled to allow emergency abortions to resume in Idaho, temporarily reversing the state's restrictive abortion policies. This decision came after legal challenges argued that the ban on emergency abortions put women's lives at risk.
Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch dissented.
The Hill has the latest on Thursday's 6-3 decision:
The ruling marks a temporary victory for the Biden administration which has struggled to protect access to abortion since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade two years ago. But dismissing the appeal from Idaho won't resolve the legal questions and will merely send the case back to the appeals court instead of rushing it through to the highest level.
Bloomberg first reported on the decision, citing an earlier draft of the ruling that the Court accidentally posted online for a brief time on Wednesday.
The ruling reinstates a lower court decision that had allowed emergency abortion care while the case continues. The Supreme Court had paused that ruling months earlier before hearing arguments in the matter in April.
The case centered on the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), which requires federally funded hospitals to provide stabilizing care to emergency room patients no matter their ability to pay. Abortion is the standard of care to stabilize many pregnancy-related conditions, and hospitals have long provided the procedure when necessary.
Following the announcement, ABC News reported an “extraordinary exchange” between Justices Samuel Alito and Ketanji Brown Jackson.
Idaho previously implemented one of the strictest abortion laws in the country, which included a near-total ban on abortions with very limited exceptions. The state's legal representatives argued that their laws were meant to protect unborn children.
However, critics, including medical professionals, warned that the restrictions endangered women's lives, especially in cases where emergency medical intervention was necessary.
The court's verdict on Thursday did not judge the merits of the case. It closely mirrored a version that briefly appeared on the court's website the day before. (RELATED: Supreme Court Bombshell Ruling Accidentally Posted Online: Report)
A spokeswoman for the court admitted on Wednesday that the publications unit had “inadvertently and briefly uploaded a document” and assured that a decision on the matter would be issued in due course.
The case, Idaho and Moyle, et al. v. United States, hinged on whether a federal provision requiring emergency care for all patients supersedes Idaho's abortion ban.
This is a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.
