WASHINGTON-
The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday will consider when doctors can perform abortions during medical emergencies in states with bans enacted after the high court’s sweeping decision overturning Roe v. Calf.
The case comes from Idaho, one of 14 states that now ban abortion at all stages of pregnancy, with limited exceptions. It is the first time the Supreme Court has considered a state ban since Roe was overturned.
The Biden administration maintains that even in states where abortion is banned, federal health care law says hospitals should be allowed to terminate pregnancies in rare emergencies where a patient’s life or health is at serious risk.
Idaho maintains its ban has exceptions for life-saving abortions, but allowing it for more medical emergencies would turn hospitals into “abortion enclaves.” The state argues that the Biden administration is misusing a health care law intended to ensure that patients are not turned away based on their ability to pay.
The Supreme Court has allowed Idaho’s law to go into effect, even during emergencies, as the case unfolded.
Before the start of arguments Wednesday, protests were brewing outside the courthouse. “Abortion saves lives,” read signs displayed by abortion rights supporters. Opponents displayed a sign that read: “Emergency rooms are not abortion clinics.”
Doctors have said Idaho’s abortion ban has already affected emergency care. More women whose conditions are normally treated with abortions must now be flown out of state for care, as doctors must wait until they are near death to perform abortions within the confines of state law.
Meanwhile, complaints from pregnant women who were turned away in U.S. emergency rooms increased after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, according to federal documents obtained by The Associated Press.
Anti-abortion groups blame doctors for mishandling maternal emergency cases. Idaho maintains that the Biden administration is exaggerating health care issues to undermine the state’s abortion laws.
The justices also heard another abortion case this term that sought to restrict access to abortion medications. It remains pending, although judges generally seemed skeptical of the push.
The Justice Department originally brought the case against Idaho, arguing that the state’s abortion law conflicts with the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act of 1986, known as EMTALA. Requires hospitals that accept Medicare to provide emergency care to any patient regardless of their ability to pay. Almost all hospitals accept Medicare.
Initially, a federal judge sided with the administration and ruled that abortions were legal in medical emergencies. After the state appealed, the Supreme Court allowed the law to take full effect in January.
The Supreme Court is expected to rule at the end of June.