Abortion remains legal as an emergency medical procedure in Idaho, for now, after a Thursday U.S. Supreme Court ruling, while a bill that would cement those protections in Illinois law awaits Gov. JB Pritzker鈥檚 signature.
The saw the three liberal justices concur with the order. Three of the court鈥檚 conservatives 鈥� Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett 鈥� concurred separately. The dismissal sent the case back to the lower courts and reinstated a temporary injunction on Idaho鈥檚 law banning all abortions except as 鈥渘ecessary to prevent the death of the pregnant woman鈥� or in the case of rape or incest.
The case originated after the Justice Department sued Idaho shortly after its abortion ban went into place in the summer of 2022. The Justice Department claimed the state was in violation of the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, or EMTALA, which it said allowed medical professionals to perform abortions to prevent 鈥済rave harm,鈥� not just death, in order to resolve medical emergencies.
Thursday鈥檚 order dismisses the case as 鈥渋mprovidently granted,鈥� meaning the court decided it shouldn鈥檛 have agreed to hear the case at this stage. It does not permanently resolve the case, as it will continue in the lower courts and could potentially end up in front of the high court鈥檚 justices again.
鈥淭oday鈥檚 ruling thus puts the case back where it belongs, and with the preliminary injunction in place,鈥� Justice Elena Kagan wrote in a concurrence with the court鈥檚 dismissal.
The decision drew ire from the high court鈥檚 dissenters, with Justice Samuel Alito writing that, having already agreed to hear the question, there was 鈥渘o good reason to change course now.鈥�
鈥淎pparently, the Court has simply lost the will to decide the easy but emotional and highly politicized question that the case presents,鈥� Alito wrote. 鈥淭hat is regrettable.鈥�
The decision drew cautious support from abortion-rights activists. Gov. JB Pritzker, in a statement issued through his abortion-rights organization Think Big America, accused Republicans of 鈥渇ighting to let hospitals refuse care for dying women.鈥�
鈥淭oday鈥檚 ruling offers a small respite from some of the harshest outcomes, but it is not the broad protection that women and healthcare professionals are owed,鈥� Pritzker said in the statement.
Pritzker, a longtime proponent of abortion rights, is expected to sign a bill sometime soon that would enshrine protections similar to the federal EMTALA law in Illinois statute.
The proposal, , would codify abortions as a 鈥渟tabilizing treatment鈥� that doctors must offer when necessary, in emergency situations such as ectopic pregnancy, preeclampsia, and fertility loss related to pregnancy complications. The measure passed on partisan lines.
Its chief sponsor, Rep. Dagmara Avelar, D-Bolingbrook, said on Thursday that the 鈥減rimary reason鈥� the bill was introduced was to preserve the status quo in case a Supreme Court decision casts doubt on EMTALA鈥檚 coverage of abortion procedures.
鈥淲hile the Supreme Court preserved EMTALA for now, it has not ruled out future legal battles,鈥� Avelar told Capitol News Illinois.
is a nonprofit, nonpartisan news service covering state government. It is distributed to hundreds of print and broadcast outlets statewide. It is funded primarily by the Illinois Press Foundation and the Robert R. McCormick Foundation, along with major contributions from the Illinois Broadcasters Foundation and Southern Illinois Editorial Association.
