There has unsurprisingly been much talk and debate surrounding abortion and what are “reproductive rights” since the overturn of Roe v Wade by the Supreme Court. Neither was it surprising that a large number of U.S .states quickly proposed legislation that would effectively ban abortion in one form or another.
Some states have made it illegal to have an abortion performed after a certain length of pregnancy. Some have prohibited it after being able to hear the heartbeat. While still others have banned it for pretty much any instance, with some exceptions, of course.
As a strong and long Republican-held state, Idaho is one of the latter. Republican Idaho Governor Brad Little signed into law a measure that bans all elective abortions in the state, regardless of how far along the pregnancy is or what condition the baby is in.
Naturally, those on the political left, including the Biden administration, are none too happy about the law. And so, Biden’s Attorney General Merrick Garland announced a lawsuit against the state and their newly instated law earlier this month.
The administration argues that the state’s new law directly conflicts with that of a federal one known as the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act or EMTALA. Basically, the 1986 statute ensures that patients, upon arriving at an emergency facility or hospital, are given the life-giving treatments and medical care they need.
Garland’s argument is that sometimes, life-giving treatment is an abortion. And he’s not wrong. In some instances, the best and only option to save a mother’s life is indeed an abortion.
So, he argues that the state cannot ban that treatment or make it prosecutable. As he said in a recent statement, “A state law that attempts to prevent a hospital from fulfilling its obligations under EMTALA violates federal law and the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution.”
The only problem with this argument is that the state’s new law doesn’t actually violate the federal statute. Neither is it banning abortions in instances where it is needed to save a woman’s life. In fact, it’s one of the few exceptions to that state’s pro-life law.
But apparently, the federal judge assigned to the court case agrees with Garland and Biden, saying that at least this provision of the new law should not be allowed. On Wednesday, U.S. District Judge B. Lynn Winmill ruled that when abortion is necessary for hospital care, the state’s law cannot supersede the federal one, at least temporarily. So far, it’s just a temporary block.
Clearly, this issue is a bit of a non-issue, given that it basically does nothing to prevent either the rest of Idaho’s law from going into effect or abortion from being used in emergency situations.
But isn’t that just like the Democrats to make a big deal out of something that doesn’t need to be?
And, of course, given that the judge essentially just gave the Biden admin a win, the White House is celebrating.
White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in a statement, “Yesterday, a federal Idaho district court determined that women in Idaho will continue to receive life-saving and health-preserving emergency care – including abortion care. This ruling will prevent serious harm to women in Idaho.”
Again, the state’s law never jeopardized life-saving and emergency care procedures. But it’s not like the progressives can just let a law like this slide without some ridiculousness.
Jean-Pierre also had the audacity to claim that this was just one more way in which the Biden administration was ensuring that the American people had the right to make “their own personal health care decisions… without interference from politicians.”
Oh, wait. You mean how the administration pushed to force us all to be vaccinated for a virus that, for most people, is essentially just like the flu without extensive research as to what it would do to us or our children? Hell, Biden is still pushing for vaccinations all around.
So much for being able to make our own health decisions… Of course, when it comes to the murder of innocents, all the rules change, don’t they?