Biden's Department of Justice filed suit against Idaho in August of 2022, arguing that the law violated the 1986 Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA). EMTALA requires stabilizing treatment for any conditions jeopardizing an individual's health. The Biden administration argued that Idaho's law's language was too restrictive, and it would have prohibited medical treatment legally required by EMTALA.
On August 24, 2022, District Judge B. Lynn Winmill (a Clinton appointee) issued a preliminary injunction blocking Idaho from enforcing the pro-life law while the case continued. He agreed with the Biden administration that the law conflicted with EMTALA.
The 9th Circuit based its decision on the Idaho Supreme Court's interpretation of the pro-life law. The panel found that the law does not appear to be in conflict with EMTALA.
"The Supreme Court of Idaho clarified that the text of the exception means what it says: If a doctor subjectively believes, in his or her good faith medical judgment, that an abortion is necessary to prevent the death of the pregnant woman, then the exception applies. Thus the district court’s reliance on declarations of certain doctors claiming that the law would undermine their medical judgement is no longer valid."
Judge Lawrence VanDyke also wrote for the 9th Circuit panel,
"The purpose of EMTALA is not to impose specific standards of care— such as requiring the provision of abortion—but simply to “ensure that hospitals do not refuse essential emergency care because of a patient’s inability to pay.” To read EMTALA to require a specific method of treatment, such as abortion, pushes the statute far beyond its original purpose, and therefore is not a ground to disrupt Idaho’s historic police powers."
While the temporary injunction has been lifted, the DOJ's lawsuit still continues. Biden's DOJ could also ask an 11-judge panel from the 9th Circuit or the Supreme Court to reconsider the injunction.