John,

Hours ago, the Supreme Court inadvertently posted a not-yet-released decision in the EMTALA case around emergency abortions, indicating a 6-3 decision to dismiss the case and allow emergency abortions to resume in Idaho while litigation continues.

The question at the heart of the EMTALA case is whether Idaho’s abortion ban blocks emergency healthcare workers from providing urgent abortion care to a pregnant patient who needs to be stabilized, despite a federal protection guaranteeing everyone access to emergency medical care.

Today’s posted opinion does not protect emergency abortion care long-term, nor does it resolve questions about the intersection of state and federal abortion policies.

We are always relieved when an anti-abortion attack fails to cause further damage to reproductive rights.

But if the leaked decision is reflective of the final outcome, the Supreme Court has decided not to actively protect pregnant patients in emergency situations, and that is wholly unacceptable.

Pregnancy is dangerous enough, and medical professionals shouldn’t have to worry about facing jail time for stabilizing their patients and providing care in times of crisis.

While we await the official decision in this case, we also await Republicans across the country applauding this outcome as proof of their “moderate” approach to abortion access. But the ban at the center of this case originated in the Republican-controlled Idaho state legislature, and similar laws continue to attack reproductive healthcare in state after state.

This case is proof that what starts in one state never stays there: we must fight for reproductive freedom at the source of the attacks – in state and local elections nationwide.