Utah

How the SCOTUS ruling on Idaho’s emergency abortion ban will affect patient transfers to Utah

Published

2 years ago

June 27, 2024

How the SCOTUS ruling on Idaho’s emergency abortion ban will affect patient transfers to Utah

SALT LAKE CITY — The United States Supreme Court sidestepped a decision Thursday on whether federal law requires states to provide pregnancy terminations in medical emergencies even in cases where the procedure would otherwise be illegal.

Instead, the court’s opinion – which stems from Idaho’s near-total abortion ban – kicked the legal questions surfaced in the case back to the lower courts and reinstated a previous ruling that will allow doctors in the state to perform emergency abortions in the meantime.

That means women in Idaho are unlikely – at least for now – to be airlifted to nearby states like Utah for the procedure.

“After today, there will be a few months — maybe a few years — during which doctors may no longer need to airlift pregnant patients out of Idaho,” Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote of the decision’s impact, in an opinion that dissented in part and concurred in part with the broader court’s ruling.

But the dismissal of the case leaves open key legal questions and sets up the potential that the issue of emergency room abortion care will come to the court again in the future.

In her brief, Jackson was critical of the court’s indecision, arguing that the ruling represented “not a victory” for Idaho patients but a “delay” – and that doctors still face the difficult decision of “whether to provide emergency medical care in the midst of highly charged legal circumstances.”

Conservatives Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett joined Jackson and her liberal colleagues, Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, in the 6-3 opinion, which was erroneously posted online Wednesday. Justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas dissented.

In his opinion, Alito also argued that the legal questions in the case – which come as abortion has become a political flashpoint in the U.S. presidential election – should have been decided, saying it was as “ripe for decision as it will ever be.”

“Apparently, the Court has simply lost the will to decide the easy but emotional and highly politicized question that the case presents,” he wrote.

Alito indicated that he would have ruled against the Biden administration’s interpretation that the federal Emergency Medical Treatment & Labor Act (EMTALA), which requires hospital emergency rooms that receive Medicare funding to provide treatment to people experiencing medical emergencies, supersedes Idaho’s abortion ban.

Idaho law allows doctors to terminate a pregnancy for any woman with emergency health complications who is clearly on the brink of death. But it’s quiet on the question of what to do when pregnancy complications put someone’s health at risk but don’t imminently risk her life.

Under threat of jail time and loss of their medical licenses, Idaho doctors said prior to Thursday’s ruling that they sometimes had no choice under such circumstances but to send a woman across state lines by helicopter or advise her to otherwise get to another state for treatment.

“Those transfers measure the difference between the life-threatening conditions Idaho will allow hospitals to treat and the health-threatening conditions it will not,” Kagan wrote in a concurring opinion Thursday.

Some women were transferred to reliably blue states like Washington and Oregon. But Utah’s capital was “one of the places we’ll tend to call first,” Stacy Seyb, a physician specializing in maternal-fetal medicine at St. Luke’s Hospital in Boise, told FOX 13 earlier this year.

While abortion remains legal up to 18 weeks in Utah, a near-total ban is currently on hold pending a ruling from the Utah Supreme Court.

Rep. Karianne Lisonbee, R-Clearfield, sponsored the abortion ban in the House and noted in a statement that “today’s Supreme Court ruling has no direct implications on Utah’s strong pro-life laws, including our trigger law.” “Utah will continue to stand up for policies that protect the unborn,” she added.

Thursday’s ruling does mean doctors in Idaho likely won’t have to airlift patients to Utah and other states, which Planned Parenthood Association of Utah Chief Corporate Affairs Office Shireen Ghorbani called a “small victory.”

“But what should have happened honestly is the Supreme Court should have said you have a right to emergency medical treatment, you’ve had that right for 40 years and you should have the right to an abortion if that is the appropriate medical care for the complication for the experience that you’re having,” she argued.

Regardless of the court’s decision, Ghorbani said she expects some Idaho women will still have to come to Utah for abortion care.

“Twenty two percent of their OBGYNs have left the state, they are running very low on specialists in maternal-fetal medicine,” Ghorbani noted. “That reality has now been created for people who live in Idaho. So there may still be people from Idaho who are seeking emergency medical care in Utah and this is what happens when we ring this bell.”

Recently released data from the Guttmacher Institute, a research group that supports abortion rights, showed that 7% of all abortions performed in the state last year were for non-residents coming to Utah from Idaho. The data showed some Utah women also traveled out of state in 2023, to both Nevada and Colorado.

Source link

Utah

Why Utah Represents Arizona State’s True Turning Point

Published

2 hours ago

February 28, 2026

Press Room

Why Utah Represents Arizona State’s True Turning Point

Arizona State basketball is at a crossroads. After back-to-back road losses to Baylor and TCU, the Sun Devils are suddenly fighting just to stay above .500.

Now, with Utah coming to town Saturday afternoon, this isn’t just another conference game. It feels bigger than that. It feels like the moment that decides whether this season still has life or if it quietly fades away.

The Danger of Falling Below .500

All season long, Arizona State has had one strange pattern.

Every time they dropped to .500, they responded with a win. They never let things spiral.

But now they’re sitting right on the edge again.

A loss to Utah would push them below .500 for the first time all year. That might not sound dramatic, but it matters for team morale.

Teams feel that shift. Confidence changes. Urgency changes. And with only a few games left before the Big 12 Tournament, there isn’t much time to recover.

That’s why this Utah game feels different.

Feb 21, 2026; Waco, Texas, USA; Baylor Bears guard Isaac Williams (10) scores a basket over Arizona State Sun Devils guard Anthony Johnson (2) during the second half at Paul and Alejandra Foster Pavilion. Mandatory Credit: Chris Jones-Imagn Images | Chris Jones-Imagn Images

Utah Is Playing Better — Especially on Defense

When these two teams met a few weeks ago, Utah was struggling.

Since then, they’ve improved. They’re still built around their top scorers, who combine for around 40 points per game, but the real difference lately has been defense.

Utah has started putting together more complete defensive performances. They’re contesting shots better. They’re finishing possessions. They’re not folding as easily in the second half.

That matters because Arizona State’s biggest issue right now isn’t effort, it’s physical depth.

Feb 21, 2026; Waco, Texas, USA; Arizona State Sun Devils head coach Bobby Hurley disputes a call with an official during the first half against the Baylor Bears at Paul and Alejandra Foster Pavilion. Mandatory Credit: Chris Jones-Imagn Images | Chris Jones-Imagn Images

The Real Niche Problem: Guard-Heavy and Worn Down

Here’s something that doesn’t get talked about enough: Arizona State’s roster balance is off.

Because of injuries, especially the likely season-ending absence of Marcus Adams Jr., the Sun Devils are extremely guard-heavy right now. More than half of the available players are guards. That creates matchup issues, especially against physical teams.

We saw it against TCU. They got to the free-throw line 36 times.

They won the physical battle. Even when their best scorer struggled, they still controlled the game inside.

ASU just doesn’t have the same frontcourt depth.

With only a few true bigs available and some undersized forwards playing bigger roles than expected, the team can get worn down.

Late in games, that shows up in missed rebounds, second-chance points, and tired legs.

It’s not about hustle. It’s about bodies.

Why Saturday Truly Matters

If Arizona State beats Utah, everything changes.

Suddenly, you’re heading into Senior Night against Kansas with momentum. Win that, and you’re talking about a possible 7–11 conference finish and a much better Big 12 Tournament matchup.

From there? Anything can happen.

But if they lose Saturday, the math and the hope get much harder.

That’s why this game isn’t just about Utah.

It’s about belief. It’s about roster limitations. And it’s about whether this team has one more push left in them before the season runs out.

Source link

Utah

Utahns first or eroding the Utah way? House OKs measure cracking down on illegal immigration

Published

14 hours ago

February 28, 2026

Press Room

Utahns first or eroding the Utah way? House OKs measure cracking down on illegal immigration

SALT LAKE CITY — A controversial Utah proposal to crack down on the presence of immigrants in the country illegally that had seemed stalled gained new life Friday, passing muster in new form in a relatively narrow vote.

In a 39-33 vote, the Utah House approved HB386 — amended with portions of HB88, which stalled in the House on Monday — and the revamped measure now goes to the Utah Senate for consideration.

The reworked version of HB386, originally meant just to repeal outdated immigration legislation, now also contains provisions prohibiting immigrants in the country illegally from being able to tap into in-state university tuition, certain home loan programs and certain professional licensing.

The new HB386 isn’t as far-reaching as HB88, which also would have prohibited immigrants in the country illegally from being able to access certain public benefits like food at food pantries, immunizations for communicable diseases and emergency housing.

Moreover, Rep. Trevor Lee, R-Layton and the HB88 sponsor, stressed that the new provisions in HB386 wouldn’t impact immigrants in the country legally. He touted HB88 as a means of making sure taxpayer money isn’t funneled to programming that immigrants in the country illegally can tap.

Rep. Lisa Shepherd, R-Provo, the HB386 sponsor, sounded a similar message, referencing, with chagrin, the provision allowing certain students in the country illegally to access lower in-state tuition rates at Utah’s public universities. Because of such provisions “we’re taking care of other countries’ children first, and I want to take care of Utahns first. In my campaign I ran and said Utahns first and this bill will put Utahns first,” she said.

If we stop young folks who have lived here much of their life from going to school and getting an education, it is really clear to me that we have hurt that person. It’s not clear to me at all that we have benefitted the rest of us.

–Rep. Ray Ward, R-Bountiful

The relatively narrow 39-33 vote, atypical in the GOP-dominated Utah Legislature, followed several other narrow, hotly contested procedural votes to formally amend HB386. Foes, including both Democrats and Republicans, took particular umbrage with provisions prohibiting immigrants in the country illegally from being able to pay in-state tuition and access certain scholarships.

As is, students in the country illegally who have attended high school for at least three years in Utah and meet other guidelines may pay lower in-state tuition, but if they have to pay out-of-state tuition instead, they could no longer afford to go to college.

“If we stop young folks who have lived here much of their life from going to school and getting an education, it is really clear to me that we have hurt that person. It’s not clear to me at all that we have benefitted the rest of us,” said Rep. Ray Ward, R-Bountiful.

Rep. Hoang Nguyen, D-Salt Lake City, noted her own hardscrabble upbringing as an immigrant from Vietnam and said the changes outlined in the reworked version of HB386 run counter to what she believes Utah stands for.

“I fear that what we’re doing here in Utah is we are eroding what truly makes Utah special, the Utah way. We are starting to adopt policies that are regressive and don’t take care of people. Utahns are one thing. Citizens are one thing. People is the first thing,” she said.

Rep. John Arthur, D-Cottonwood Heights, said the measure sends a negative message to the immigrant students impacted.

“If we pass this bill today, colleagues, we will be telling these young people — again, who have graduated from our high schools, these kids who have gone to at least three years of school here — that you’re no longer a Utahn,” he said.

If we are compassionate to those who come the legal way and we are compassionate to those who already live here, that does not mean that we lack compassion for others in other ways.

–Rep. Kristen Chevrier, R-Highland

Rep. Kristen Chevrier, R-Highland, said the debate underscores a “fallacy” about compassion. She backed the reworked version of HB386, saying Utah resources should be first spend on those in the country legally.

“If we are compassionate to those who come the legal way and we are compassionate to those who already live here, that does not mean that we lack compassion for others in other ways,” she said.

The original version of HB386 calls for repeal of immigration laws on the books that are outdated because other triggering requirements have not been met or they run counter to federal law.

The Key Takeaways for this article were generated with the assistance of large language models and reviewed by our editorial team. The article, itself, is solely human-written.

Source link