Federal judge blocks interpretation of Idaho law that prohibits out-of-state abortion referrals

A federal judge in Idaho has granted a preliminary injunction to block an opinion from the state’s attorney general prohibiting referrals from physicians for out-of-state abortions, even though the opinion had already been withdrawn.

Idaho has some of the harshest abortion restrictions in the U.S., with the termination of pregnancy being banned except for cases that threaten the mother’s life, or in cases of rape or incest where an incident has been reported to law enforcement.

In March, Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador (R) sent a letter to Idaho state Rep. Brent Crane (R), clarifying the extent of the state’s abortion laws.

Labrador wrote in the letter that Idaho state law “prohibits an Idaho medical provider from either referring a woman across state lines to access abortion services or prescribing abortion pills for the woman to pick up across state lines.”

U.S. District Court Judge B. Lynn Winmill on Monday granted an injunction requested by health care providers including Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest and the Hawaiian Islands (PPGNHI) to block this interpretation of the law.

“While we’re glad to see this outcome, the truth is that we should never have gotten to this point. The legal opinion issued by Attorney General Labrador was the result of Rep. Crane partnering with an extremist anti-abortion group to try to game the system, and all parties are complicit in denying Idaho patients critical medical information since the letter was shared,” PPGNHI CEO Rebecca Gibron said in a statement.

This letter was meant to be private and was not issued as formal guidance, but the anti-abortion group Stanton International obtained the letter and posted it on its website. The attorney general later withdrew the opinion and said his letter was “mischaracterized as law enforcement guidance sent out publicly to local prosecutors and others.”

Despite Labrador’s withdrawal, the plaintiffs in the case expressed concerns that this interpretation of the law might still be enforced, leading to physicians incorrectly being found in violation.

While the state government argued the withdrawal of the legal opinion made the legal proceedings moot, since there was essentially no interpretation to argue against anymore, Winmill found in his ruling that the withdrawal letter itself did meet the standard for making the case moot.

“The analysis underlying the Withdrawal Letter is entirely procedural. It neither rejects the Crane Letter’s statutory interpretation, nor provides an alternative that would resolve the Medical Providers’ concern that their conduct is unlawful under Idaho’s criminal abortion statute,” Winmill wrote.

“Simply put, the withdrawal letter does not indicate that Attorney General Labrador has changed his position, much less establish that such a change is now ‘entrenched’ or ‘permanent.'”

In his order, Winmill specifically granted the plaintiffs’ request to block Labrador’s ability to enforce his previous interpretation of the law but denied a request for an injunction on the Idaho State Board of Medicine and the Idaho State Board of Nursing and also deferred any rulings on individual county prosecuting attorneys.

In a statement provided to The Hill, Idaho Attorney General’s Office spokesperson Beth Cahill said, “In his 28-year career you’d be hard pressed to find a time when Judge Winmill has ruled against Planned Parenthood, so his decision is not surprising. Judge Winmill wants to restrain a power we don’t possess. We strongly disagree with his order.”