1 00:00:02,100 --> 00:00:04,433 AMNA NAWAZ: This week, the Trump administration moved to dismiss a lawsuit against the state of 2 00:00:04,433 --> 00:00:09,200 Idaho that sought to allow abortions in the case of medical emergencies. 3 00:00:09,200 --> 00:00:14,200 Idaho is one of 12 states across the country with a near-total abortion ban. 4 00:00:16,133 --> 00:00:19,600 The Biden administration originally sued Idaho, arguing that federal law requires 5 00:00:19,600 --> 00:00:23,633 doctors to perform an abortion if a patient's life is at risk. 6 00:00:23,633 --> 00:00:26,600 Joining me now to discuss the impact is Mary Ziegler, 7 00:00:26,600 --> 00:00:31,200 a professor at U.C. Davis School of Law and legal historian on reproductive rights. 8 00:00:31,200 --> 00:00:34,033 Mary, welcome back to the "News Hour." Thanks for joining us. 9 00:00:34,033 --> 00:00:35,833 MARY ZIEGLER, University of California, Davis, School of Law: Thanks for having me. 10 00:00:35,833 --> 00:00:38,000 AMNA NAWAZ: So we should note the Supreme Court did weigh in on this 11 00:00:38,000 --> 00:00:42,800 case last year. It's that ruling that allowed emergency abortions to continue in Idaho, 12 00:00:44,533 --> 00:00:46,766 but they kicked the key legal question back to this appeals court. 13 00:00:46,766 --> 00:00:51,666 So, Mary, what does the Trump administration's move to dismiss the case mean for its future? 14 00:00:53,533 --> 00:00:56,933 MARY ZIEGLER: Well, at the moment, the case seems to be dead on arrival. 15 00:00:56,933 --> 00:01:00,133 There's an interesting question about whether some other party will try to 16 00:01:00,133 --> 00:01:04,433 intervene to keep the case alive, in other words, whether there will be some other 17 00:01:04,433 --> 00:01:09,433 party with standing that can step in where the Trump administration has backed away. 18 00:01:10,633 --> 00:01:13,400 But we don't know yet if that's going to happen. 19 00:01:13,400 --> 00:01:16,866 AMNA NAWAZ: So emergency room doctors had been performing what they deemed 20 00:01:16,866 --> 00:01:21,866 to be lifesaving abortions while this was in litigation. Without the case, 21 00:01:21,866 --> 00:01:26,433 where does that leave doctors on the ground and patients in need of this care? 22 00:01:26,433 --> 00:01:29,433 MARY ZIEGLER: It leaves them in a tremendous amount of uncertainty. 23 00:01:29,433 --> 00:01:34,433 Idaho has maintained throughout this litigation that its abortion ban permits what it views as 24 00:01:36,766 --> 00:01:39,866 medically necessary abortions. Physicians have been unclear as to whether that's true and I think 25 00:01:42,166 --> 00:01:45,333 also unwilling to risk the kind of penalties that Idaho law authorizes for making the wrong guess. 26 00:01:47,166 --> 00:01:49,766 And we have seen, since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, 27 00:01:49,766 --> 00:01:52,266 that physicians have been pretty risk-averse. So we 28 00:01:52,266 --> 00:01:56,500 would expect to see more of the same in Idaho. And that will, of course, 29 00:01:56,500 --> 00:02:01,466 have impacts on patients seeking abortion and also patients with wanted pregnancies. 30 00:02:02,733 --> 00:02:04,733 AMNA NAWAZ: There was, it's my understanding, 31 00:02:04,733 --> 00:02:08,533 a sort of test period in Idaho in which the ban was in place before the Biden era 32 00:02:10,600 --> 00:02:13,500 litigation sort of paused the implementation there. Did we see anything in the way of 33 00:02:13,500 --> 00:02:18,500 impact during that period that tells us what could be ahead for the impact on the ground? 34 00:02:19,433 --> 00:02:21,833 MARY ZIEGLER: Yes, we did. 35 00:02:21,833 --> 00:02:24,233 So there were several instances in which patients had to be airlifted to other hospitals because 36 00:02:24,233 --> 00:02:29,233 physicians in Idaho were unwilling to treat them or unsure if they could intervene. Again, 37 00:02:29,233 --> 00:02:33,900 I think Idaho maintained that that was an overreaction by physicians. 38 00:02:33,900 --> 00:02:37,633 But we're going to see more of the same almost inevitably because physicians are 39 00:02:37,633 --> 00:02:42,633 unwilling to risk their liberty and livelihoods on guessing whether their conduct will fit within 40 00:02:44,700 --> 00:02:48,900 an exception. And we'd expect to see more of the same as this law goes back into effect. 41 00:02:50,433 --> 00:02:52,733 AMNA NAWAZ: So, more broadly, in terms of the implication here, 42 00:02:52,733 --> 00:02:56,900 I mean, what is this signal to you about how this Trump administration views and plans to 43 00:02:58,900 --> 00:03:03,466 interpret federal laws that are designed to protect emergency or urgent care when they 44 00:03:05,233 --> 00:03:08,500 bump up against state laws like state abortion bans that conflict with that? 45 00:03:08,500 --> 00:03:10,633 MARY ZIEGLER: Yes, I mean, one of the things I think that's telling is that 46 00:03:10,633 --> 00:03:15,400 the Trump administration hasn't been particularly vocal about its positions 47 00:03:15,400 --> 00:03:19,933 on abortion. It hasn't been something that President Trump has been foregrounding. 48 00:03:19,933 --> 00:03:24,500 But I think, slowly and without a lot of fanfare, we're starting to see the Trump administration 49 00:03:24,500 --> 00:03:28,833 bringing policy into alignment with the preferences of the anti-abortion movement. And, 50 00:03:28,833 --> 00:03:32,700 of course, there are other things we're waiting to see on that front too, most notably access 51 00:03:32,700 --> 00:03:37,533 to mifepristone, which is a drug used in more than half of all abortions in the United States. 52 00:03:37,533 --> 00:03:41,833 This week, the Trump administration asked a judge, Matthew Kacsmaryk, 53 00:03:41,833 --> 00:03:46,833 for more time to review the administration's position on mifepristone in critically 54 00:03:48,633 --> 00:03:50,900 important litigation going forward. So I think this is a sign that there's 55 00:03:50,900 --> 00:03:55,833 going to be more to come from the Trump administration in moving policy in a pretty 56 00:03:55,833 --> 00:03:59,500 radically or considerably conservative direction when it comes to abortion. 57 00:03:59,500 --> 00:04:04,466 AMNA NAWAZ: Related to mifepristone access, there was Mr. Trump's pick to lead the FDA. Dr. Marty 58 00:04:06,700 --> 00:04:09,733 Makary, who was in his confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill today, was asked about access 59 00:04:09,733 --> 00:04:14,733 to that abortion pill, and would only say that he has no preconceived plans on mifepristone policy. 60 00:04:16,600 --> 00:04:20,900 So do you foresee access to mifepristone going away under new FDA leadership? 61 00:04:23,300 --> 00:04:25,400 MARY ZIEGLER: It seems pretty likely that access to mifepristone will change. I don't know if the 62 00:04:25,400 --> 00:04:29,700 FDA and the Trump administration will move to entirely eliminate mifepristone access, 63 00:04:29,700 --> 00:04:34,400 for example, by using the Comstock Act or just removing mifepristone from the market, 64 00:04:34,400 --> 00:04:39,233 or if instead the Trump administration will roll back restrictions that had 65 00:04:39,233 --> 00:04:42,866 been in place on mifepristone and eliminate telehealth access to it. 66 00:04:42,866 --> 00:04:45,266 But it seems like that's the bare minimum we're likely to 67 00:04:45,266 --> 00:04:49,366 see. I think it's more likely to be a question of when, rather than if. 68 00:04:49,366 --> 00:04:52,233 AMNA NAWAZ: Mary Ziegler from U.C. Davis School of Law, 69 00:04:52,233 --> 00:04:56,100 always good to speak with you. Thank you so much for making the time. Appreciate it. 70 00:04:56,100 --> 00:04:57,633 MARY ZIEGLER: Thanks for having me.