Supreme Court Conservatives Clearly Not Done Restricting Abortion - Alliance for Justice

Supreme Court Conservatives Clearly Not Done Restricting Abortion

Press Release



Reproductive Rights

Press Contact

Zack Ford

WASHINGTON, D.C., April 24, 2024 – Today the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the consolidated cases of Moyle v. U.S. and Idaho v. U.S., which address the conflict between Idaho’s abortion restrictions and the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA). EMTALA requires that hospitals provide stabilizing care to patients facing medical emergencies, but Idaho’s law forces doctors to choose between letting pregnant patients suffer and facing criminal prosecution for providing life-saving abortion care.

The three liberal justices led the charge against Idaho’s attorney, making clear that in their mind, this is an open-and-shut case. Justice Alito, however, disturbingly entertained the notion of fetal personhood by suggesting that doctors had an equal commitment to saving the life of an “unborn child,” placing pregnant patients at significant risk. This comes just two years after Alito drafted Dobbs v. Jackson and assured that abortion restriction would be left up to the states.

Alliance for Justice President Rakim H.D. Brooks issued the following statement:

“Today’s oral arguments were a disturbing reminder that our Supreme Court is packed with conservative activists with a determined agenda. Every single person who critiqued Justice Alito’s Dobbs opinion is unfortunately validated today: The Supreme Court will remain involved in cases of reproductive freedom indefinitely and to the detriment of pregnant people and our most fundamental rights.

“We should not be living in a world where pregnant patients may have to suffer permanent damage, potentially lose organs and future reproductive function, or possibly even die because of criminal abortion bans. The whole point of EMTALA is that doctors should be unimpeded when it comes to stabilizing the patient in front of them, and Idaho’s abortion ban clearly infringes on this care. Hopefully there are enough votes to nip this in the bud and prevent any future confusion about what it means to care for someone facing a health crisis involving their pregnancy — but I am doubtful.”