Connect with us

News

Idaho Court Expands Abortion Ban Medical Exceptions

Published

on

Idaho Court Expands Abortion Ban Medical Exceptions

A state judge in Idaho appeared to slightly broaden access to abortion there by ruling on Friday that an exception to the state’s ban does not require the woman to be facing impending death.

Idaho’s ban, one of the strictest in the nation, prohibits abortion in almost all cases. One exception is when it is necessary to prevent the death of the pregnant woman. Judge Jason D. Scott ruled that abortions are allowed if a doctor deems that the woman is likely to die sooner without an abortion than she would otherwise — even if her death “is neither imminent nor assured.”

The ruling, which kept the law in place, handed a partial victory to reproductive rights advocates and Idaho doctors who said the ban had forced them to wait for patients to reach the brink of death before they could act, or rush them out of state to get care elsewhere.

“I feel very reassured” by the ruling, said Dr. Emily Corrigan, an Idaho obstetrician-gynecologist who is one of the plaintiffs. “I think there’s many, many more case scenarios where the patient’s condition would squarely fall within that exception.”

Idaho’s attorney general, Raúl Labrador, who was one of the defendants, said in a statement that Idaho law has never required doctors to wait until a woman’s death is certain or imminent before providing an abortion. “While we still disagree with portions of the ruling, it confirms what my office has argued in courts from Boise to Washington, D.C. — that Idaho’s abortion laws are constitutional and protect both unborn children and their mothers,” he said.

Advertisement

It was unclear on Saturday whether his office would appeal the decision.

The Idaho judgment arose from a lawsuit filed in September 2023 by the Center for Reproductive Rights on behalf of four women who said they had to leave the state to receive abortions after learning that they faced serious health risks or that their fetuses would not survive. The suit was joined by Dr. Corrigan, another physician and a family physicians’ organization.

The plaintiffs argued that state law should permit abortions in cases where continuing a pregnancy is unsafe or where the fetus has been diagnosed with a fatal condition.

Judge Scott of Idaho’s Fourth District did not go as far as the plaintiffs wanted, rejecting the claim that abortions should be allowed when a fetus won’t survive.

But he found that doctors may provide an abortion when, in their medical judgment, a patient “faces a non-negligible risk of dying sooner without an abortion,” even if death is not certain or immediate. The exception does not apply when that risk arises from potential self-harm, the judge ruled.

Advertisement

The lead plaintiff, Jennifer Adkins, 33, was 12 weeks pregnant with her second child when doctors told her the fetus had a rare genetic condition that carried a high mortality rate and that her pregnancy was probably nonviable. Doctors said that if Ms. Adkins did not miscarry, she would be at high risk of developing a life-threatening condition called mirror syndrome. Ms. Adkins, who lives in Caldwell, Idaho, near Boise, ultimately traveled 400 miles to Portland, Ore., for an abortion.

She said in an interview that she believed the judge’s ruling would have allowed her to get care in her home state.

“Having to go through something like that and lose a baby that you really, really wanted, in a place full of strangers, not surrounded by family and friends and providers that you know and trust, it was incredibly challenging, and it was incredibly sad,” she said.

In a separate case filed soon after the Supreme Court overturned the national right to abortion in 2022, the Biden administration sued Idaho over its abortion ban, arguing that the ban’s strict limits violated a federal law that requires hospitals to provide emergency care, including abortions, to any patient.

Idaho argued that its ban complied with the federal law, called the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act or EMTALA. Last year, the Supreme Court handed a temporary victory to the Biden administration, returning the case to a lower court that had put the ban on hold. But under the Trump administration, the Justice Department dropped the lawsuit, clearing the way for the ban to take effect in full.

Advertisement

In a similar lawsuit filed by St. Luke’s Health System, the largest hospital system in the state, a federal judge issued an order last month shielding its doctors from prosecution if they provided abortions in emergencies.

Dr. Corrigan said Friday’s ruling offers clarity to physicians statewide.

While the ruling applies only in Idaho, abortion-rights advocates said it illustrated the need for clearer and broader exemptions in other states that strictly ban abortion.

“The problem, whether you’re in Idaho or Texas or any of the other states that have a serious abortion ban, physicians are very conservative and very litigation-averse, very risk-averse,” said Laura Hermer, a professor at Mitchell Hamline School of Law whose research focuses on reproductive rights. “The states are trying assiduously to put the onus of this burden on health care providers.”

Many abortion opponents agree with Mr. Labrador’s contention that the existing exceptions are clear, and that doctors who claim otherwise are misreading the law.

Advertisement

Eleven other states ban abortion in almost all circumstances. Legal efforts to broaden the exemptions in those states have seen mixed results.

The Texas Supreme Court rejected a lawsuit that sought to expand exceptions for medical emergencies in the state, finding that the law already allowed abortions for women facing life-threatening conditions, “before death or serious physical impairment are imminent.”

In Tennessee, a lawsuit similar to the one in Idaho is pending.

News

Waymo called the cops on teen riders, raising privacy concerns

Published

on

Waymo called the cops on teen riders, raising privacy concerns

A Waymo robotaxi drives in San Francisco’s North Beach neighborhood this week.

Heather Diehl/Getty Images


hide caption



toggle caption

Advertisement

Heather Diehl/Getty Images

Police in San Mateo, Calif., posted Monday on social media that they had apprehended a pair of teenagers from a Waymo driverless robotaxi after the company alerted authorities to suspected criminal activity. It’s the latest incident involving video surveillance of passengers and others by autonomous vehicles — raising questions about the limits of privacy in such vehicles.

The Facebook post by the San Mateo County Police said: “Parents do you know where your teens are? @waymo does!”

The 15-year-olds were allegedly drinking alcohol and shooting toy guns from the car, according to the police. They said Waymo’s systems detected behavior that then triggered a safety response, after which the company disabled the vehicle and contacted police.

Advertisement

Waymo’s cars, equipped with an array of cameras, microphones and other sensors to monitor passengers and other nearby vehicles, are becoming more common in cities across the United States. Experts say the detention of the two teens in San Mateo highlights a potential — but not inevitable — trade-off between privacy and convenience. It also questions the extent to which companies similar to Waymo are required to hand over private data, including audio and video of passengers, in situations where a crime is suspected.

NPR reached out to Waymo, which is owned by Alphabet, the parent company of Google, for comment on the details of the San Mateo incident and how the company responded, but did not hear back. But on its website, the company says that as many as 29 cameras in its autonomous cars provide an all-around view and “are designed with high dynamic range and thermal stability, to see in both daylight and low-light conditions, and tackle more complex environments.”

“There already exist laws that govern duty to report or even duty to protect” for carriers such as Waymo, according to Alessandro Acquisti, a professor of information technology at the MIT Sloan School of Management. “The privacy problems arise when and if driverless carrier companies used such laws or ethical obligations as a pretext for blanket, indiscriminate accumulation of identifiable data for unspecified future purposes.”

That includes not just monitoring people inside the cars, but outside too. Take, for example, a hit-and-run investigation last year in Los Angeles. Media reported that the police inquiry was aided by video captured by a Waymo taxi that had a clear view of the crime. Critics suggested at the time that authorities were using the company’s vehicles as a mobile surveillance platform. And during 2025 protests in Los Angeles against Immigration and Customs Enforcement crackdowns, demonstrators vandalized Waymos, apparently angry that video recorded by the vehicles could be used by police, although there is no evidence that happened.

Continue Reading

News

Trump fires last members of election commission, inciting fears of midterm ‘chaos’

Published

on

Trump fires last members of election commission, inciting fears of midterm ‘chaos’

Donald Trump has terminated the remaining members of the independent, federal commission that assists election administration officials nationwide just a few months before the midterm elections, multiple outlets reported Thursday.

The remaining three commissioners of the four-member bipartisan commission ⁠were forced out on Thursday in different ways. The one Republican appointee resigned and the other ⁠two, Democratic appointees were notified of their terminations via email from ​the White House presidential personnel office.

“On ‌behalf of President ‌Donald J Trump, I am writing to inform you that your position ‌as Commissioner of the Election Assistance Commission is terminated, effective immediately. Thank you for your service,” the email, seen by Reuters, said.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The Election Assistance Commission serves as a “national clearinghouse of information on election ‌administration”, accredits testing laboratories and certifies voting systems, and maintains the national mail-voter registration form developed by the National ​Voter Registration Act of 1993, according to the commission’s website. The terminations follow Trump and top administration officials’ advocacy to change vote-by-mail requirements and investigations into the 2020 election outcome, which Trump lost to Democrat Joe Biden.

Advertisement

“It is ⁠irresponsible and dangerous that this Administration remains dead set on ​causing chaos for ​our election officials across this ​country,” Arizona secretary of state Adrian Fontes said in a ​Thursday statement. “This ‌move undermines the integrity ​of nonpartisan ​election administration.”

The 2002 law that established the commission, the Help America Vote Act, states the president can appoint replacements to the commission.

It is unclear how Trump will move ahead with the commission.

Reuters contributed reporting

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Former Olympian pleads not guilty in reflecting pool vandalism charges

Published

on

Former Olympian pleads not guilty in reflecting pool vandalism charges

Former U.S. Olympian David Hearn (left) walks with his attorney Norman Eisen to speak to reporters and protesters gathered after his arraignment at the Superior Court of the District of Columbia in Washington, D.C. on Thursday.

Finn Gomez/Getty Images


hide caption



toggle caption

Advertisement

Finn Gomez/Getty Images

Former U.S. Olympic canoeist David Hearn pleaded not guilty to damaging the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool in D.C. Superior Court Thursday morning.

Federal prosecutors charged Hearn with a single count of destruction of property causing more than $1,000 in damage to the pool.

Hearn has previously claimed, which his attorneys repeated during a short press conference outside the court, that he simply touched the water in the pool out of curiosity.

Advertisement

The Trump administration had just completed a $14 million renovation of the pool.

But shortly after the work finished, peeling paint and algae gathered in the water. The remodel has been largely criticized as a massive failure and waste of taxpayer dollars.

Superior Court Judge Carmen McLean released Hearn on his own recognizance. His next hearing is scheduled for Aug. 5.

Norm Eisen, one of Hearn’s attorneys, spoke to reporters outside of court following the hearing. He said the administration is using Hearn as a “scapegoat … for their own failures.”

“It is not a crime to touch the reflecting pool, to touch water in the United States of America,” he said.

Advertisement

Prosecutors say there is a host of evidence against Hearn.

This is a developing story.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending