“You’re hedging,” Barrett said.

Later she asked Turner where Idaho’s conflict is with EMTALA if the state claims doctors can provide abortions in the hypothetical cases the federal government laid out.

“If there’s no instance where EMTALA and Idaho law clash, then why are you here?” Barrett asked.

Justices question impact of ruling for EMTALA

Prelogar, who grew up in Idaho, argued the federal government’s case. She told the justices that EMTALA is “simple but profound.”

“This case is about how that guarantee (of emergency stabilizing care) applies to women who are pregnant,” Prelogar said.

She, too, faced a rigorous line of questioning.

Justice Clarence Thomas, a conservative voice on the court, opened questioning by raising the issue of whether a spending clause — as he referred to EMTALA — can override states’ criminal laws, setting up the main critique the justices had for the solicitor general.

EMTALA is tied to federal Medicare funding. Hospitals that accept such funding are required to comply with EMTALA.

Thomas told Prelogar he found it “odd” that the regulated body in question — hospitals — was not party to the case. Justice Samuel Alito, the court’s most staunch conservative, doubled down on Thomas’ point.

...continued

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