The Supreme Court allows emergency abortions in Idaho for now in a limited ruling

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court cleared the way Thursday for Idaho hospitals to provide emergency abortions, for now, in a procedural order that left key questions unanswered and could mean the issue ends up before the conservative-majority court again soon.

The order was briefly posted on the court's website accidentally on Wednesday and abruptly removed. By a 6-3 vote, it reverses the court's earlier order that had allowed an Idaho abortion ban to go into effect, even in medical emergencies.

Abortion is an animating issue in the 2024 election campaign, a direct result of the court’s seismic ruling two years ago that overturned the nationwide right to abortion. But in this decision and another that preserved access to abortion medication, the court stopped short of issuing broader rulings.

The Idaho order doesn’t answer key questions about whether doctors can provide emergency abortions elsewhere, a significant issue as most Republican-controlled states have moved to restrict the procedure.

In Texas, for example, an appeals court has sided with the state, finding federal health care law does not trump a state ban on abortion. Complaints of pregnant patients being turned away from emergency rooms in Texas immediately spiked following the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, according to federal documents obtained by The Associated Press.

The Supreme Court took up the Idaho case after the Biden administration sued to allow abortions in emergency cases where a woman's health was at serious risk. Idaho had argued that its law does allow life-saving abortions and the federal government was wrongly pushing for wider exceptions.

But the contours of the issue have changed in the months since the court agreed to hear it, Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote in a concurrence joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

“I am now convinced that these cases are no longer appropriate for early resolution,” Barrett wrote, pointing to revisions Idaho made to its abortion ban and the Biden administration making clear it was only seeking to allow emergency abortions in rare cases. Kavanaugh and Barrett were both part of the majority who voted to overturn Roe v. Wade.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said the court should have decided now, arguing its earlier order meant Idaho doctors were forced to watch as patients suffered or were airlifted out of state for care.

“While this court dawdles and the country waits, pregnant people experiencing emergency medical conditions remain in a precarious position,” she said, underscoring her views by reading a summary of her opinion aloud in the courtroom. “This court had a chance to bring clarity and certainty to this tragic situation, and we have squandered it.”

Her fellow liberals agreed with the dismissal.

White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said, “No woman should be denied care or wait until she’s near death or forced to flee her home state just to receive the healthcare she needs.”

Conservative Justice Samuel Alito, who authored the Dobbs v. Jackson decision that overturned Roe, disagreed with the decision to dismiss the case now. Joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas, he suggested the court should side with Idaho. Federal health care law “conclusively shows that it does not require hospitals to perform abortions," he wrote.

The opinion's premature release marked the second time in two years that an abortion ruling went out early, though in different circumstances. The court’s landmark ruling ending the constitutional right to abortion was leaked to Politico.

President Joe Biden said the court's Wednesday order ensures that Idaho women can get the care they need while the case continues to play out.

“Doctors should be able to practice medicine. Patients should be able to get the care they need,” he said.

White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said, “No woman should be denied care or wait until she’s near death or forced to flee her home state just to receive the healthcare she needs.”

Attorney General Merrick Garland said the Justice Department will continue pressing its case and using “every available tool to ensure that women in every state have access to that care."

A new poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found that about 7 in 10 U.S. adults favor protecting access to abortions for patients who are experiencing miscarriages or other pregnancy-related emergencies.

Dr. Kara Cadwallader, a family medicine doctor in Boise, said she’s hopeful the ruling will allow for appropriate medical care when a patient’s health is threatened in Idaho. She described a pregnant patient whose membranes ruptured halfway through her pregnancy, leaving her at risk for bleeding to death and sepsis. An Idaho hospital said they couldn’t care for her because she needs an abortion and instead recommended she go out of state.

It took the patient two weeks to get an appointment set up in Seattle, Cadwallader said. Now, patients like her can get treatment in Idaho.

“That is incredibly important for those of us on the ground actually seeing patients, because we’ve been shipping these patients out of state unnecessarily for something we could be easily taking care of for them here at home,” she said.

Abortion-rights groups said the opinion would bring temporary relief, but leave “devastating” uncertainty about the larger picture. “This fight is far from over,” said Alexa Kolbi-Molinas, deputy director of the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project.

Idaho State Attorney General Raúl Labrador said the Biden administration's position had shifted to become “far more modest” than it appeared with the case was first filed. Idaho will still be able to enforce its law in the vast majority of circumstances, he said, citing Barrett's concurrence.

Still, he also expected the issue to end up back before the Supreme Court. “We feel pretty strongly we’re going to win this case in the end,” he said.

The Biden administration has also appealed the Texas emergency abortion ruling to the high court, leaving another avenue for the issue to appear again. The justices are unlikely to even consider whether to take up the Texas case before the fall.

__

Associated Press writers Fatima Hussein, Colleen Long and Amanda Seitz in Washington, Darlene Superville aboard Air Force 1, Christine Fernando in Chicago and Hallie Golden in Seattle contributed to this report.

Follow the AP’s coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court at https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court.

The Supreme Court building is seen, Wednesday, June 26, 2024, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

FILE - Tourists visit the Supreme Court, Tuesday, June 25, 2024, in Washington. The Supreme Court has overturned the bribery conviction of a former Indiana mayor in an opinion that narrows the scope of public corruption law. The high court on Wednesday sided with James Snyder, who was convicted of taking $13,000 from a trucking company after prosecutors said he steered about $1 million worth of city contracts their way. Snyder has maintained his innocence, saying the money was payment for consulting work. Snyder is a Republican. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin, File)

The Supreme Court building is seen on Thursday, June 27, 2024, in Washington. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein)

Law enforcement officers stand behind barricades outside the Supreme Court on Thursday, June 27, 2024, in Washington. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein)

Katie Mahoney, left, and Rev. Patrick Mahoney, chief strategy officer for Stanton Healthcare, an Idaho-based pregnancy center that does not provide abortions, read the text of a Supreme Court decision outside the Supreme Court on Thursday, June 27, 2024, in Washington. The Supreme Court cleared the way Thursday for Idaho hospitals to provide emergency abortions for now in a procedural ruling that left key questions unanswered and could mean the issue ends up before the conservative-majority court again soon. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein)

Demonstrators stand outside the Supreme Court on Thursday, June 27, 2024, in Washington. The Supreme Court cleared the way Thursday for Idaho hospitals to provide emergency abortions for now in a procedural ruling that left key questions unanswered and could mean the issue ends up before the conservative-majority court again soon. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein)

Rev. Patrick Mahoney, center, chief strategy officer for Stanton Healthcare, an Idaho-based pregnancy center that does not provide abortions, is flanked by Katie Mahoney, left, and supporter Kevin Krueger, right, as he speaks to the press outside the Supreme Court on Thursday, June 27, 2024, in Washington. The Supreme Court cleared the way Thursday for Idaho hospitals to provide emergency abortions for now in a procedural ruling that left key questions unanswered and could mean the issue ends up before the conservative-majority court again soon. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein)

Katie Mahoney, left, and Rev. Patrick Mahoney, chief strategy officer for Stanton Healthcare, an Idaho-based pregnancy center that does not provide abortions, read the text of a Supreme Court decision outside the Supreme Court on Thursday, June 27, 2024, in Washington. The Supreme Court cleared the way Thursday for Idaho hospitals to provide emergency abortions for now in a procedural ruling that left key questions unanswered and could mean the issue ends up before the conservative-majority court again soon. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein)

Katie Mahoney, left, and Rev. Patrick Mahoney, chief strategy officer for Stanton Healthcare, an Idaho-based pregnancy center that does not provide abortions, read the text of a Supreme Court decision outside the Supreme Court on Thursday, June 27, 2024, in Washington. The Supreme Court cleared the way Thursday for Idaho hospitals to provide emergency abortions for now in a procedural ruling that left key questions unanswered and could mean the issue ends up before the conservative-majority court again soon. At right is supporter Kevin Krueger. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein)

NEW YORK (AP) — Video released late Saturday shows an officer in upstate New York fatally shooting a 13-year-old boy who had been tackled to the ground after he ran from police and pointed a replica handgun at them.

The teen was killed a little after 10 p.m. Friday in Utica after officers in the city about 240 miles (400 kilometers) northwest of Manhattan stopped two youths in connection with an armed robbery investigation, police said.

The youths, both 13, matched the descriptions of the robbery suspects and were in the same area at around the same time the day after, police said. One was also walking in the road, a violation of state traffic law.

The body camera video released by police captures an officer saying he needs to pat them down to ensure they don't have any weapons in their possession. Immediately one of the two, identified by police as as Nyah Mway, runs away.

Authorities froze frames of the video where a running Nyah Mway appears to point the gun at the pursuing officers. Police also edited the video to insert a red circle around the weapon to show it to viewers.

The officers believed it was a handgun, police said, but it was later determined to be a replica of a Glock 17 Gen 5 handgun with a detachable magazine.

“During a ground struggle” with the teen, one of the officers fired a single shot that struck the boy in the chest, Utica Police Chief Mark Williams said.

The teen was given “immediate” first aid by the officers and taken to Wynn Hospital, where he died, the chief said.

The replica gun carried by the teen “is in all aspects a realistic appearing firearm with GLOCK markings, signatures, detachable magazine, and serial numbers,” Lt. Michael Curley, a police spokesperson, said via email. “However ultimately it fires only pellets or BB’s.”

A bystander video posted to Facebook shows one of the officers chasing after Nyah Mway and tackling him to the ground. It also shows the officer punching the teen as two other officers arrive. A gunshot rings out as the teen is on the ground and the officers quickly stand up.

The officer who fired his gun was identified as Patrick Husnay, a six-year veteran of the agency. Husnay and Officers Bryce Patterson and Andrew Citriniti were placed on administrative leave with pay.

The police body camera video shows a chaotic scene.

Nyah Mway points the replica handgun at the officers while he runs from them. The officers scream “gun!” to each other as they run. Patterson then tackles and punches Nyah Mway, and as the two are wrestling on the ground, Husnay opens fire.

Officers initially thought Nyah Mway may have shot himself, and Patterson says, “I don’t know if he shot me.” It is not clear whether he is referring to Nyah Mway or his fellow officer. Patterson was not struck.

Bystanders scream at the police throughout the recordings, and at one point an officer yells back: “We’re trying to save him right now!”

The other youth was detained in the back of a police vehicle and was not involved in the shooting.

During his “public safety statement,” a brief interview typically done in the aftermath of a police shooting to ensure there is no additional threat, Husnay said he fired one round “straight towards the ground.” He did not know whether Nyah Mway had fired at the officers but said he thought the weapon was a 22-caliber handgun.

The police department released the body camera videos following a public outcry as the shooting roiled Utica, a city with a population of 65,000. It is home to more than 4,200 people from Myanmar, according to The Center, a nonprofit that helps to resettle the refugees.

Nyah Mway, who local media reports said was an 8th grader at Donovan Middle School, was identified as a refugee born in Myanmar and a member of the Karen ethnic minority.

Karens are an ethnic minority among the groups warring with the military rulers of Myanmar, the Southeast Asian country formerly known as Burma. The army ousted the elected government of Aung San Suu Kyi in 2021 and suppressed widespread nonviolent protests that sought a return to democratic rule.

A tense news conference Saturday ended early as Williams, the city’s mayor and an interpreter struggled to speak over repeated audience outbursts. Members of the community, including the youth’s family, were in attendance.

The police department is conducting an internal investigation to see whether officers followed policies and training. The state attorney general will open its own case to determine if the shooting was justified.

“I want to offer my heartfelt condolences to the family of the deceased party during this difficult time,” Williams said. "This is a tragic and traumatic incident for all involved.”

Dazio reported from Los Angeles. Follow Philip Marcelo at twitter.com/philmarcelo.

This combination of images released by the Utica Police Department shows a replica of a Glock 17 Gen 5 handgun recovered after an officer fatally shot a 13-year-old boy who had been tackled to the ground after he ran from police and pointed the replica gun at them on Friday, June 28, 2024, in Utica, N.Y. (Utica, N.Y., Police Department via AP)

Utica Mayor Michael Galime, center right, grey jacket, talks with the family members of a 13-year-old boy who was fatally shot by a police officer Friday night after a news conference, Saturday, June 28, 2024 in Utica, N.Y. An officer shot and killed the teenager who was fleeing while wielding a “realistic appearing firearm," authorities said Saturday. (Kenny Lacy Jr./Syracuse.com via AP)

Police investigate the scene of Friday nights shooting in Utica, N.Y., early Saturday, June 29, 2024. An officer shot and killed a teen fleeing while pointing a replica gun, police said Saturday. (Kenny Lacy Jr./Syracuse.com via AP)