Supreme Court Punts in Moyle v. United States: A Setback for Reproductive Rights
Thursday, June 27, the U.S. Supreme Court released an order in the Moyle v. United States that essentially declined to issue an opinion on the case. This is a punt on the central issue this case raised, which will determine whether Idaho’s restrictive abortion ban can be enforced against people who are in serious medical crisis and need an abortion to stabilize their condition and preserve their health. With no official word from the Supreme Court, the case will return to the lower court for continued litigation.
When the Supreme Court agreed to hear this case in January, they blocked the lower court’s decision that would have protected access to health-saving abortion care in Idaho during the pendency of the litigation. For nearly six months, the Supreme Court’s actions allowed Idaho’s abortion ban to remain in effect even in medical emergencies, directly resulting in patients being airlifted out of state to receive time-sensitive care that otherwise could have been provided in-state. In the words of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson in her partial dissent, “this months-long catastrophe was completely unnecessary.”
Thursday’s order ends the Supreme Court’s stay, reinstating the lower court’s ruling and allowing medical providers to resume providing emergency care. While this is a small relief, it is not a win for abortion access and does not help people in states like Louisiana where restrictive abortion bans are actively deteriorating the quality of healthcare for pregnant people.
We know abortion access is widely supported in the United States, and that abortion bans are negatively impacting healthcare, gender equity, and quality of life in states where they are in effect. The Supreme Court's 2022 decision in Dobbs created a national reproductive health crisis and has been widely criticized, leading to significant shifts in cultural attitudes towards judicial and legislative intervention in abortion access. Given the issue’s political saliency, it is not surprising that our disproportionately conservative Supreme Court would punt on an important abortion decision in the months leading up to a presidential election in order to deceptively appear more moderate.
As Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote in her dissent:
“So, to be clear: Today’s decision is not a victory for pregnant patients in Idaho. It is delay. While this Court dawdles and the country waits, pregnant people experiencing emergency medical conditions remain in a precarious position, as their doctors are kept in the dark about what the law requires. This Court had a chance to bring clarity and certainty to this tragic situation, and we have squandered it. And for as long as we refuse to declare what the law requires, pregnant patients in Idaho, Texas, and elsewhere will be paying the price.”
This decision illustrates the critical need for Louisiana’s lawmakers to pass legislation that will allow doctors to provide the care their patients need when they are facing a serious pregnancy complication. This is what we have been fighting for since the Dobbs decision, and we will continue to fight for this as well as the full repeal of Louisiana’s abortion bans.