The Trump administration has dropped a Biden-era lawsuit that attempted to force Idaho health care practitioners to perform emergency abortions despite the state’s near-total abortion ban. By dropping the lawsuit, the federal government will no longer attempt to usurp the state’s pro-life law and force abortions.

President Donald Trump’s Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a stipulation of dismissal letter Wednesday in an Idaho federal court stating that both parties in the case, the federal government and the State of Idaho, agreed to the dismissal of all the claims brought against Idaho’s abortion law. The agreement effectively cancels the case known as Idaho v. United States and dissolves an injunction blocking the state from fully enforcing its abortion law. 

Under the previous administration, the DOJ sued Idaho claiming that its “Defense of Life Act,” which forbids abortion except to save the life of the mother or in cases of rape or incest, violated the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA). The 1986 EMTALA statute mandates hospitals provide stabilizing treatment at emergency rooms even if patients cannot afford to pay. Biden’s DOJ somehow rationalized that EMTALA’s “stabilizing care” provision included abortions and required doctors to perform them under a broader set of exceptions than just to preserve the life of the mother. Biden argued that its interpretation of EMTALA should prevail over state abortion laws and that abortions must be performed when patients request it.

In a press release, Idaho’s Attorney General Raul Labrador stated that the Idaho Supreme Court had already made it very clear that the state’s “Defense of Life Act” already allows doctors to make “subjective, good-faith medical judgments” for when the life of the mother is threatened. Labrador then noted that there was no need for “meddlesome” litigation since EMTALA does not mandate a standard of care, nor requires abortion, but specifically requires emergency rooms “to treat both mothers and their unborn children.”

The case had made it all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court in April 2024 but the High Court did not rule on the merits opting to remand it back to the lower courts where it is now dissolved.

However, Idaho’s abortion law continues to face a separate legal challenge. In January 2025, St. Luke’s Hospital System in Idaho brought a nearly identical lawsuit as to Biden’s claiming the state’s abortion ban prevents women from getting abortions as part of emergency medical care. In St. Luke’s Health System v. Labrador, U.S. District Judge B. Lynn Winmill, who had previously levied the injunction in Biden’s lawsuit, issued a temporary restraining order against Idaho’s attorney general’s office blocking it from enforcing the “Defense of Life Act” pending the results of a later proceedings. For now, doctors are free to perform abortions in situations beyond just saving the life of the mother, including when the mother is in “serious jeopardy” or to avoid “serious impairment” or “dysfunction” of bodily functions or organs.

Idaho’s Attorney General’s office noted that abortions are “never” the only necessary “stabilizing treatment” for a medical emergency and is at the very least just an option under EMTALA. 

“Idaho’s Defense of Life Act is perfectly consistent with the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, which requires doctors to care both for women and their ‘unborn children,’” stated Labrador. “Idaho’s law expects doctors to save women’s lives.”

Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver said, “Idaho’s abortion ban currently remains in place except for emergency room situations. EMTALA requires doctors to treat both a pregnant woman and her unborn child, so this so-called requirement to perform abortions in emergency situations grossly misconstrues federal law. EMTALA cannot be conscripted by the abortion lobby to force abortions.”