(Washington) The US Supreme Court appears poised to once again allow abortion in medical emergencies in the state of Idaho, where it is almost completely banned, according to a document briefly published in error on the site of the Court, Bloomberg agency reported on Wednesday.
By its historic judgment of June 2022 annulling the federal guarantee of the right to abortion, the Court with a conservative majority gave states full latitude to legislate in this area. Since then, around twenty have banned abortion, whether carried out by medication or surgery, or have strictly regulated it.
Among them, rural and conservative Idaho (northwest) only allows rare exceptions, such as in cases of incest or imminent danger of death for the pregnant woman. Outside of this framework, anyone performing an abortion risks up to five years in prison.
But in 2022 a federal judge, seized by the administration of Democratic President Joe Biden, partially blocked the application of this law to the extent that it would contradict a federal law on medical emergencies.
The federal law, called EMTALA, requires hospitals affiliated with the government health insurance Medicare – the majority of them – to treat anyone with a medical emergency.
But in January, the Supreme Court suspended the first instance decision while it ruled on the merits, therefore restoring the ban on abortion in Idaho in its full application.
After hearing the arguments of both parties in April and with its decision expected any day now, the Court, by six votes to three – those of the most conservative judges – finally decided to lift this suspension and to divest itself of the file, according to the published document briefly published on its site and consulted by Bloomberg.
This text does not include reasons, but refers to an appeal “inopportunely granted” and considers it necessary to refer the case to lower courts, possibly to a federal court of appeal.
The Supreme Court spokeswoman confirmed in a statement that a document had been “inadvertently posted briefly on the site”, without specifying its content and stressing that the final decision would be made “in due course”.