In its argument, the federal government noted that EMTALA does not mandate any specific stabilizing procedures. Instead, it leaves medical decisions up to the providers — many of whom told the Statesman they regularly see cases for which abortion is an appropriate procedure to stabilize an emergency patient and protect their health.

Turner’s opening statement asserted that EMTALA does not require doctors to break state laws to provide stabilizing emergency medical care. After just a few minutes of laying out his argument, Turner stood for questions from the justices.

Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan intensely interrogated Turner’s case, at times cutting his responses short to ask further questions.

The justices asked Turner for clarification on Idaho’s understanding of EMTALA. Turner told Brown that, while he agrees EMTALA imposes a requirement for hospitals to stabilize patients, “the question is the content of the stabilizing requirement.”

Turner also quibbled over some of the language of EMTALA, which requires doctors to stabilize patients with “treatment or accommodations that are available or medically indicated.” Turner said abortion is not a treatment available to doctors holding an Idaho medical license.

Sotomayor swiftly argued against that point. She raised a hypothetical situation in which a state might attempt to limit treatment for diabetes to exclude the usual standard of care.

“No state licensing law would allow a state to say, ‘Don’t treat diabetics with insulin, treat them with pills,’” Sotomayor said.

Turner told the court that Idaho law exists alongside EMTALA. He said in all hypothetical situations of obstetrical emergency presented by the federal government in the case, Idaho law would allow doctors to perform an abortion if they do so in good faith that the procedure will save the patient’s life.

“Nobody’s arguing that these cases don’t raise tough medical questions,” Turner said. “Idaho does not require that doctors wait until (patients) are on the verge of death.”

Justice Amy Coney Barrett, one of the court’s more conservative justices, called Turner out for creating a confusing argument after he told the court exemptions are “case by case.”

...continued

©2024 Idaho Statesman. Visit at idahostatesman.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.