Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Sonia Sotomayor questioned Wednesday when Idaho’s extreme law would allow emergency abortion care
The women on the Supreme Court appeared to band together Wednesday during oral arguments in a case out of Idaho that could shape how hospitals in Republican-led states respond to life-threatening pregnancy complications.
Even conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a Catholic abortion opponent, had some fierce inquiries for Idaho Solicitor General Joshua Turner, who refused to specify what medical conditions qualify for emergency abortions.
“Counsel, I’m kind of shocked actually because I thought your own expert had said below that these kinds of cases were covered. And you’re now saying they’re not?” Barrett said.
Wednesday’s case involves a ruling on the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, or EMTALA, a Reagan-era law that bars hospitals that accept Medicare from turning away anybody suffering from a medical emergency, requiring they provide stabilizing treatment or safe transport to a facility if they are unable to perform the procedure.
I’d say the law is very clear (“screw women.”)
The real problem is the law was crafted in a way specifically to create this veneer of reasonableness while making the exceptions so absurdly late that it’d be hilarious if it didn’t mean women are likely to die from it.
Agreed