Moyle v. United States

EMTALA's requirement that hospitals provide emergency stabilizing care directly conflicts with Idaho's near-total abortion ban when abortion constitutes the necessary treatment. This confrontation would ordinarily invoke Supremacy Clause preemption to invalidate the state prohibition. The Supreme Court sidestepped this constitutional question by dismissing the case as improvidently granted after Idaho amended its law to address the perceived conflict, leaving the district court's injunction intact without ruling on the merits of EMTALA preemption. Consequently, Idaho's emergency abortion restrictions remain blocked at the district level, but the Court's avoidance leaves the EMTALA preemption doctrine unresolved for other states and future cases.