The case marks the first time the Supreme Court has considered the implications of a state ban since the nationwide right to abortion was overturned. It comes from Idaho, which is among 14 states that now ban abortion at all stages of pregnancy with very limited exceptions.
While members of the high court's conservative majority expressed concern about pregnant patients' ability to get emergency care in the state, it was unclear whether any were swayed by the Biden administration's argument.
The Justice Department says abortion care must be allowed in emergencies that seriously threaten a woman's health under a federal health care law that requires hospitals accepting Medicare to provide emergency care regardless of patients' ability to pay.
“How can you impose restrictions on what Idaho can criminalize, simply because hospitals in Idaho have chosen to participate in Medicare?” said Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote the decision overturning Roe v. Wade.
Justices on the high court's liberal minority, meanwhile, raised questions about whether Idaho's law was putting women's health at risk.
“Within these rare cases, there’s a significant number where the woman’s life is not in peril, but she’s going to lose her reproductive organs. She’s going to lose the ability to have children in the future unless an abortion takes place,” said Justice Elena Kagan.
Idaho contends its ban has exceptions for life-saving abortion but allowing it in more medical emergencies would turn hospitals into "abortion enclaves." The state argues the Biden administration is misusing a health care law that is meant to ensure patients aren't turned away based on their ability to pay.
The Supreme Court has allowed the Idaho law to go into effect, even during emergencies, as the case has played out. It makes performing an abortion a felony punishable by up to five years in prison.
