The Justice Department sued Idaho this month, but its ability to influence policies in Republican states with so-called trigger laws is limited.
-
Send any friend a story
As a subscriber, you have “>10 gift articles to give each month. Anyone can read what you share.
Give this article
- Read in app
Under Idaho’s “trigger law,” there are no provisions made for women who are likely to incur serious health problems, including organ damage, by continuing their pregnancies.
A federal judge in Idaho blocked part of the state’s strict abortion ban on Wednesday, delivering a limited but significant victory to the Biden administration, which has tried to support reproductive rights since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June.
This month, the Justice Department sued Idaho, one of the most reliably conservative states in the country, arguing that the law would prevent emergency room doctors from performing abortions necessary to stabilize the health of women facing medical emergencies.
Judge B. Lynn Winmill of the Federal District Court in Idaho wrote in a decision announced a day before the ban was to be enacted that doctors in the state could not be punished for acting to protect the health of endangered mothers.
The Justice Department argued that the measure violated a federal law known as the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, which requires medical professionals in hospitals that accept Medicare funding to take whatever steps are necessary to save the life of anyone, including pregnant women.
The pause on enforcement will continue until a lawsuit challenging the ban is resolved, the judge said.
The lawsuit was the first major action undertaken by the Biden administration to protect access to abortion since the Supreme Court’s decision in June left states to determine whether to end the practice. The department’s ability to influence policies in Republican states that have adopted so-called trigger laws, which effectively banned abortion almost immediately after the Supreme Court’s ruling, is limited, and the actions are likely to affect only a small percentage of pregnant women.
State officials did not immediately respond to news of the ruling, but they are expected to appeal the decision.
Most abortions are now banned in at least 10 states since the court issued its ruling, and restrictions in a handful of other states, including Idaho, North Dakota, Tennessee and Texas, would take effect this month, barring court challenges.
Gov. Brad Little of Idaho, a Republican, has described the Justice Department’s lawsuit as “federal meddling.” The Supreme Court had “returned the issue of abortion to the states to regulate — end of story,” he said this month.
Idaho’s trigger law does allow abortions in cases involving rape or when a woman’s life is in danger. But there are no provisions made for women who are likely to incur serious health problems, including organ damage, by continuing their pregnancies.
The Supreme Court’s decision, and the race by conservative-leaning states to impose abortion bans, has prompted a powerful political backlash. In early August, voters in Kansas resoundingly decided to preserve a 2019 ruling by the state’s Supreme Court interpreting the state Constitution as protecting abortion rights. The ballot initiative was the first referendum on abortion rights since the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision.
In July, after the federal Department of Health and Human Services released guidance to ensure access to abortion in certain emergency situations at hospitals that receive Medicare funding, Attorney General Ken Paxton of Texas filed a lawsuit challenging the rules.
Charlie Savage contributed reporting.
Source: nytimes.com
