Idaho Federal Judge Sides with Pro-Abortion Left

Just as we expected would happen, we’re beginning to see a series of judicial rulings in this new post-Dobbs world we now find ourselves living in. And not surprisingly, the radical pro-abortion Left is weaponizing our legal system to protect abortion.

After the Supreme Court decision that said Roe v. Wade is no longer the law of the land, we predicted there would start to be decisions in the state courts and lower federal courts. We knew abortionists like Planned Parenthood and the pro-abortion Left weren’t going to take the Supreme Court’s decision sitting down. They’ve already begun taking their fight to preserve their abortion-on-demand, any time (including after birth in some states), for any reason to courtrooms in numerous states across the country.

I wanted to specifically draw attention first to a case in Texas where there was an initial lawsuit going against the state’s pro-life trigger law from going into enforcement. But thankfully, that has now changed.

ACLJ Senior Counsel CeCe Heil joined me to provide a brief synopsis and an update in this case between the State of Texas and the Biden Department of Health and Human Services (HSS):

So Texas was actually the one that brought suit against HHS and they were saying that HHS can’t mandate a Texas hospital to perform an abortion through the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act that is in direct contradiction with their Texas law. And the judge in Texas agreed with Texas that the HHS had surpassed their authority by trying to say that the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act trumped Texas’ state law that outlawed abortion with their trigger law.

Then, just yesterday in a very similar case, a federal district judge in Idaho blocked part of that state’s abortion ban, ruling the exact opposite way of the federal judge in Texas. The district court judge in Idaho asserted that the court was being asked to address whether the State’s “criminal abortion statute conflicts with a small but important corner of federal legislation.” Which he ruled it does. The legislation he’s referring to is the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, and we argued in our amicus brief in that case that it really should not conflict at all.

CeCe Heil pointed out a crucial piece of the Act that the judge seemed to overlook in his abortion distortion:

They always spin things . . . . What’s very interesting is he quotes the language of the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act ALMOST exactly. Here’s what the language actually says: ‘A medical emergency is one that places the health of the individual’, now get this part, ‘or with respect to a pregnant woman, the health of the woman or her unborn child in serious jeopardy.’ So the actual language of the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act actually protects the unborn child’s life from being placed in serious jeopardy. He clearly in his opinion leaves that one point out. He just talks about the health of the woman in serious jeopardy, not the unborn child. So an argument can be made even under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, that protects the life of the unborn child. So he is really not doing anything by enforcing this Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act because a doctor should try to protect the health of an unborn child from serious jeopardy.

Folks here’s where it’s really going to get complicated and it’s going to create a problem, especially for conservatives. You have some states that want to ban abortion completely, no exceptions, even in cases where the life of the mother is in jeopardy, or in cases of rape and incest. I understand where those feelings are coming from, but quite frankly folks, states that attempt to pass total bans on abortion with no exceptions will lose. We could lose every state now, even after Dobbs, if we don’t work smarter, and with empathy. Thankfully, in the Idaho case, there was a life of the mother exception, but the court blocked it anyway.

And if you’re wondering what a case in another state like Texas or Idaho has to do with you, it’s because the fight isn’t over. Roe was just the beginning, and now the abortion machine is more desperate than ever. Logan gave a great explanation for why we all need to stay vigilant and activated, even in cases outside of our home states:

I think it was important, yeah, take your victory lap, be happy about the fact that Roe was overturned. But now look to the states and look to the voters, and when there are more extreme measures put in place you have a lot of people who find themselves in the middle on this and maybe they get activated. Maybe they get activated to vote in a way that they weren’t going to vote three months ago. So that really does change everything and you have to be aware.

Logan is right. It is crucial that we all stay on top of all of these state cases, because if the Left wins one state, they will move on to the next two. They want to enshrine a so-called right to abortion in every state constitution. We cannot rest on our laurels. There’s much work to be done.

This issue is becoming more than just a legal issue. It’s now become a political issue. In fact as my son Logan Sekulow said, it may now be more of a political issue than it even is a legal one.

Today’s full Sekulow broadcast includes more discussion of this Idaho case as well as other critical life cases we’re involved with in Idaho and other states. We’re also joined by ACLJ Senior Advisor for National Security and Foreign Policy Ric Grenell who shares his unique analysis of President Biden’s latest attempt to buy votes by waiving federal student loans.

Watch the full broadcast below: