U.S. Court in Idaho Enjoins Application of State’s Abortion Law to Provider Out-of-State Referrals
- August 04, 2023
A federal judge preliminarily enjoined July 31 the Idaho Attorney General (AG) from prosecuting medical providers under the state’s criminal abortion statute for providing information about or referring patients to legal out-of-state abortion services.
The U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho held that plaintiff medical providers were likely to succeed on the merits of their claim that the AG’s interpretation of the Idaho criminal abortion statute unconstitutionally prohibited their speech in violation of the First Amendment.
Idaho’s criminal abortion statute makes performing an abortion a felony punishable by at least two and up to five years’ imprisonment. The statute also calls for the suspension or permanent revocation of health care professionals’ licenses if they “assist” in performing an abortion.
Planned Parenthood Greater Northwest and several medical providers brought the instant action after a letter drafted by AG Raúl Labrador for a state lawmaker was made public. The letter interprets the “assists” in performing language as prohibiting medical providers from referring or prescribing abortion pills for women to access across state lines. The AG withdrew the letter after the lawsuit was filed.
As a threshold issue, the court found plaintiff medical providers had standing—they previously made referrals for out-of-state abortion services but stopped doing so since the AG’s letter became public.
Plaintiffs' “self-censorship” because of the letter was a sufficient injury to confer standing for their First Amendment claim even if no specific threat of enforcement had been leveled against them, the court said.
Although the letter was not sent to the specific medical providers, it was “targeted to them insofar as they belong to that small group of individuals who would be subject to criminal prosecution and licensure action under the letter's interpretation of the law,” the court added.
The court also found the AG’s withdrawal of the letter shortly after the case was filed did not moot the action. The AG withdrew the letter on procedural, rather than substantive grounds, and nowhere disavowed its interpretation or expressly stated the law would not be enforced in such a manner.
Turning to the merits, the court held plaintiffs were likely to succeed on their claim that the AG’s interpretation of the law violated the First Amendment by “impermissibly regulat[ing] speech based on content and viewpoint.”
Specifically, the court noted that “health care providers are silenced on a single topic—abortion" and could still "provide information and referrals about out-of-state resources like anti-abortion counseling centers or prenatal care.”
Planned Parenthood Greater Northwest v. Labrador, No. No. 1:23-cv-00142-BLW (D. Idaho July 31, 2023).