All right, welcome back, everybody. We have the 4th and
final apparently ruling of the day for the Supreme Court.
And it is indeed the ruling that according to the
Court was inadvertently posted yesterday related to of that abortion
law
in in Idaho. And apparently what we saw yesterday in
terms of the Supreme Court kind of sidestepping the issue,
sending it back to our lower court,
meaning doctors in Idaho will be allowed to perform abortions
in emergency situations.
That is going to stand.
So what we got a preview of yesterday,
we now have the full official version.
And what we learned yesterday now stands and is official,
no different than what we got in that preview yesterday.
So with that, let's bring in legal affairs correspondent Avajoy
Burnett for more on this
latest ruling. This is the 4th and final one,
we think,
for the for the day.
This is one of the big ones we were anticipating
and waiting for,
but somewhat anticlimactic because of that inadvertent posting yesterday.
Good morning to you.
Good morning, everyone. So it's as if we got a
CHEAT SHEET from what came down yesterday.
This is the abortion case out of the state of
Idaho.
It was actually two cases that are all boiled down
into one.
And it's what we saw yesterday where the justices are
saying that
this was not supposed to be taken.
They think this case was prematurely taken by the US
Supreme Court.
So as of this moment,
this case will be sent back to the lower courts
and the state of Idaho will be required to continue
to conduct certain types of abortions as this moves its
way through the court system and the lower courts.
Just to refresh your memory here,
this is a case that was brought just a few
years ago after the Dobbs decision that said there's no
constitutional right to an abortion.
And the state of Idaho,
they had trigger laws which essentially said if there was
no longer a constitutional right to an abortion,
they were going to start to enact more strict abortion
rules.
And so the state started a process of limiting abortions
unless it was in instances where it was necessary to
protect the life of the mother,
also in capes of rape and incest.
The Biden administration stepped in and they said there is
actually this federal law known as Amtala.
And Amtala says you are supposed to conduct abortions
even if it's not in those rare circumstances where it's
necessary to prevent the mother from dying.
It could be in other circumstances where it's necessary to
protect the health of the mother.
And the Biden administration said that federal law Trump's the
state law.
This is why there was an injunction.
There was a pause on this particular form of abortion
in the state of Idaho,
the pause of the law there.
And then it was sent up to the US Supreme
Court to take a look at these matters.
And what we are now learning,
what's official now from the High Court is that they
believe this case should have not been taken at this
point.
They should have allowed it to work its way through
the lower courts.
And the state of Idaho,
as of this moment, will be required to conduct those
additional types of abortions,
even if the mother's life is not at risk,
because it will be considered as emergency care.
So this is a decision that came down from the
High Court today.
Remember, we were just here in the afternoon yesterday when
there was a document that was accidentally uploaded to the
Supreme Court's website and the Supreme Court's spokesperson had to
actually come out and say this is not the official
ruling.
It will be coming out in the coming days.
It will be forthcoming. And here we now have it.
In this decision, the US Supreme Court is ruling in
favor of the Biden
administration's arguments at this point.
But remember, Justice Katanji Brown Jackson said this is not
not a win for either side.
She believes the US Supreme Court should have really ruled
on the merits of this case as opposed to the
technicality that we are now seeing.
It often times does feel like a punt
from the court. We don't want to get into the
into the stake.
So we'll just deal with the parsley.
And this is a kind of
a parsley decision where there is it's a technical issue.
So in other words, because of that,
because they didn't deal with the real substance of the
case,
the core legal question remains unanswered and it does not
impact any other state.
It just goes back on the ground pretty much into
Idaho.
And maybe we'll come back before the court in some
way,
shape or form down the road.
That's my understanding. We also should point out real quick,
because I want you to respond to that and point
to
Chief Justice John Roberts in concluding today did not say
that tomorrow will be the last day.
So fresh reporting in now that.
Yeah, we're going into July 4th week with more decisions
likely to come before the holiday.
That's what it seems like right now.
So what we get tomorrow,
in other words, may not be it.
Floors back to you,
yes, So let's talk about your initial point about this
only affects the state of Idaho.
That is correct. But we also know that the court
has or is possibly going to take another case out
of the state of Texas which has a similar sort
of argument. And so we could see another case that's
very similar in front of the High Court even before
this Idaho case makes it back to the US Supreme
Court. Remember, many of these cases,
they really take quite some time to work their way
through the court system.
In some instances, it could take years before a case
actually makes it to the US Supreme Court.
And many legal experts have said the US Supreme Court
was really trying to avoid having the sort of issue
come up before the election.
Who knows if that's true?
We do not know if they actually take those things
into consideration.
But we also know that they are not living in
a bubble.
So yes, there is another case that is working its
way through.
And if I'm not mistaken,
it's already either has been accepted by the justices or
it's on the cusp of being accepted by the justices.
With regards to the timing here,
we came into today with 12 cases left and we
know that there is a possibility of a consolidation with
some cases.
So it could have been an instance where we had
even fewer than 12 cases.
Nonetheless, that was a really high number.
We got four cases that were announced today.
So at this point we have 8.
When I spoke with a legal expert last week,
they told me that it's it's really unusual for the
justices to have more than five cases per day.
Five could be a really heavy lift.
So that's why we are now anticipating.
We don't know for sure,
but that's why we are now anticipating that they could
split the remaining cases,
have some for tomorrow, and then take this really unusual
step of going into the first week of July.
I looked back in recent history and there were only
two years when they went into the first week of
July.
There was one announcement all the way down in the
end of August,
and those happened during the COVID years.
So yes, it's really unusual to have us go over
into
another week, over into the first week of July,
but nonetheless, they have really heavy cases that they need
to issue opinions on.
And that is why it is likely that we'll have
some tomorrow,
and then some, then some,
right before we head over into the 4th of July
travel weekend.
Not just for everyone else,
but for the justices as well.