Orlando, FL: Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court erroneously — and briefly — posted an opinion on the court’s website that seems to indicate that the court will temporarily allow abortions in medical emergencies in Idaho. Today, an official decision was released that came to the same conclusion. This litigation involves the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, or EMTALA, which requires doctors to stabilize or treat any patient who shows up at an emergency room.

To provide additional background: the Justice Department sued Idaho over its abortion ban, which allows a woman to get an abortion only when her life — not her health — is at risk. Idaho doctors say they were unable to provide the stabilizing treatment the federal law requires and that is typically standard of care, prompting them to airlift at least a half-dozen pregnant patients to other states since Idaho’s law took effect in January.

Below is Representative Anna V. Eskamani’s statement in response to today’s SCOTUS decision: 

Some celebrated this decision as a victory for reproductive rights. I want to be clear—this is not a victory. This is a delay. 

Justice Jackson stated this clearly in her opinion: “Today’s decision is not a victory for pregnant patients in Idaho. It is delay. While this court dawdles, pregnant people in emergencies remain in a precarious position, as their doctors are left uncertain about the law.”

We can expect another EMTALA case to come before the Supreme Court, which means we must continue to fight for reproductive freedom in this nation and state—no court is guaranteed to protect us or restore our rights. I encourage every Floridian to learn more about the Yes On Four campaign and help codify reproductive freedom here in the Sunshine State this November.