When Attorney General Merrick Garland announced the lawsuit Tuesday, he maintained that Idaho’s abortion law does not allow doctors to provide necessary medical care.
– The ban on offering abortions to women suffering from medical emergencies is criminal, says Garland, who is therefore going to court to have the state’s abortion law declared invalid.
This is the first major lawsuit in which the Justice Department directly challenges an abortion law since the US Supreme Court struck down the federal right to abortion.
Promises from Biden
It happened in June when the Supreme Court judges overruled the Roe v. Wade ruling from 1973. The Supreme Court ruled that it is now up to the states to make their own abortion laws.
Republican Idaho is just one of several states that have since introduced an almost total ban on abortion. It is believed that around half of the US states will end up with various abortion bans.
US Democratic President Joe Biden condemned the Supreme Court order and has promised to do everything in his power to ensure access to abortion.
Risks five years in prison
Federal prosecutors believe Idaho’s law would force doctors to violate the federal Emergency Medical Care and Employment Act. This law, known as Emtala, requires that anyone entering a medical clinic for urgent care be stabilized and treated.
“Idaho’s law would make it a crime for doctors to provide the emergency medical care required under federal law,” says Garland.
– Demonstrators protest the Supreme Court’s scrapping of Roe v. Wade outside the Idaho State Capitol in downtown Boise on June 24. Photo: Darin Oswald/Idaho Statesman via AP / NTB
–
The current law in Idaho in the northwest of the United States criminalizes all abortions and is scheduled to take effect on August 25. According to the law, anyone who carries out or attempts to carry out an abortion can be punished with between two and five years in prison.
Demand for a report of rape
People accused of breaking the law can defend themselves against prosecution if they can prove that the pregnancy was terminated to save a pregnant woman’s life. Alternatively, they must document that the abortion was carried out after the pregnant woman reported rape or incest to the police, and that a copy of the relevant report was submitted to the abortion clinic.
“Under Idaho law, any local or state prosecutor can indict, arrest and prosecute a doctor simply by showing that the abortion was performed, without regard to the circumstances,” the Justice Department wrote in the lawsuit.
– The law thus places the burden on the doctor to prove an “active defence” in the trial, adds the ministry.
“Useless”
Organizations that work for the rights of those who have survived sexual abuse believe that the exception for rape and incest is useless. That’s because Idaho law doesn’t allow law enforcement agencies to release reports while the investigation is ongoing — which often takes weeks or months.
Garland points out that the lawsuit against Idaho is not an attempt to “bypass the Supreme Court.”
– The Supreme Court said that each state can make its own decisions when it comes to abortion. But the federal government can also do that, says the Minister of Justice.
– We will use every tool at our disposal to ensure that pregnant women receive the emergency medical care to which they are entitled under federal law, says Garland, adding that they are also looking closely at other states’ abortion laws.
“Politically motivated”
Idaho Republican Governor Brad Little says the Supreme Court gave states the power to regulate abortion and that there is no more to say on that matter. However, he promises to work with state Attorney General Lawrence Wasden, also a Republican, to defend the law.
Wasden calls the lawsuit from Washington politically motivated and believes the Justice Department should have made direct contact with Idaho to resolve the dispute through dialogue.
– Instead, the federal government has chosen to waste taxpayers’ money in an unnecessary lawsuit, says the minister of justice in the state with just over 1.7 million inhabitants.
Texas lawsuit
In July, the Department of Health in the United States informed hospitals that they must offer abortions if the mother’s life is in danger. They pointed out that federal law preempts state abortion bans if they do not contain sufficient exceptions for medical emergencies.
Texas responded by suing the federal government. The state maintains that the Biden administration’s guidelines are illegal and that the Emtala Act does not apply to abortions. That case is still pending.
–
