WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court appears prepared to allow emergency abortions in Idaho when a pregnant patient’s health is at serious risk, according to Bloomberg News, which said a copy of the opinion was briefly posted Wednesday on the court’s website.
The document suggests the court will conclude it should not have gotten involved in the case so quickly and will reinstate a lower court order that allowed state hospitals to perform emergency abortions to protect the health of a pregnant patient, Bloomberg said. It does not appear likely to fully resolve the central issues in the case.
The Supreme Court acknowledged that a document was inadvertently posted on Wednesday. That document was quickly removed.
“The Court’s Publications Unit inadvertently and briefly uploaded a document to the Court’s website. The Court’s opinion in Moyle v. United States and Idaho v. United States will be issued in due course,” court spokeswoman Patricia McCabe said in a statement.
The case would continue in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals if the Supreme Court rejects the suit.
The conclusion may not be the court’s final decision because the judges’ decision has not been officially released.
The Biden administration has sued Idaho, arguing that hospitals must provide abortions to stabilize pregnant patients in rare emergency cases when their health is at serious risk.
Most Republican-controlled states began enforcing restrictions after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. two years ago. Idaho is among 14 states that prohibit abortion at all stages of pregnancy, with very limited exceptions. Idaho argued that its ban allows abortion to save a pregnant patient’s life and that federal law does not require expanding exceptions.
The briefly published opinion would reverse the Supreme Court’s previous order that allowed the Idaho law to take effect even in medical emergencies while the case unfolds. Since then, several women have required medical air transport out of statein cases where abortion is routine treatment to prevent infections, bleeding and other serious health risks, Idaho doctors said.
The Supreme Court’s eventual ruling could have cascading effects on emergency care in other states with strict abortion bans. Reports of pregnant women being moved away from U.S. emergency rooms increased following the 2022 Supreme Court decision that struck down the constitutional right to abortion, according to federal documents obtained by the Associated Press.
The Justice Department’s lawsuit is subject to a federal law that requires hospitals that accept Medicare to provide stabilizing care regardless of a patient’s ability to pay. The law is the Emergency Medical Treatment and Employment Act, or EMTALA.
Nearly all hospitals accept Medicare, so emergency room doctors in Idaho and other states with bans would have to perform abortions if necessary to stabilize a pregnant patient and avoid serious health risks such as loss of reproductive organs, he argued. the Department of Justice.
Idaho argued that the exception for a patient’s life covers serious health circumstances and that the Biden administration misinterpreted the law to circumvent the state ban and expand access to abortion.
Doctors said the Idaho law made them afraid to perform abortions, even when a pregnancy seriously endangers the patient’s health. The law requires that anyone convicted of having an abortion be imprisoned for at least two years.
A federal judge initially sided with the Democratic administration and ruled that abortion was legal in medical emergencies. After the state appealed, the Supreme Court allowed the law to take full effect in January.
___
This story originally appeared on Time.com read the full story
