The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled to allow emergency abortions to resume in Idaho, for the time being at least, 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.
Idaho had previously implemented some 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, particularly in cases where emergency medical intervention was needed.
Per Fox News:
In an unsigned opinion, the Court held that writs of certiorari in two cases involving the law were “improvidently granted,” and vacated stays the Court granted earlier this year. The matter will continue to be litigated on the merits in lower courts, and could end up back before the Supreme Court in the future.
On Wednesday, the court mistakenly posted a draft of the opinion on the court's website before it was taken down. Thursday's opinion appears very similar to the accidental draft, with the same outcome but without a few paragraphs from the earlier draft.
The consolidated cases, Moyle v. U.S. and Idaho v. U.S., had national attention following the high court's 2022 ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade.
Idaho's abortion law, which was triggered by the 2022 Dobbs decision overturning Roe v. Wade.
Physicians in the Gem State have argued that the law complicates emergency care for pregnant women. The number of air transports out of state for pregnancy complications from one of the state's largest hospitals has increased from one in all of 2023 to six in the first quarter of 2024.
Despite these challenges, proponents of the law argue that it includes provisions for life-threatening situations, asserting that physicians can perform abortions when necessary to save the mother's life. However, health care providers contend that these exceptions are too narrow and ambiguous, leading to delays and inadequate care.
READ NEXT: Controversial Religious Law Announced By US Official
