Case: United States v. State of Idaho

1:22-cv-00329 | U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho

Filed Date: Aug. 2, 2022

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On August 22, 2022, the U.S. Department of Justice filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho to protect what it alleged were rights of patients to access emergency abortion care guaranteed by federal law. The suit challenged Idaho Code § 18-622, which was set to go into effect on Aug. 25 and to impose a near-total ban on abortion. The complaint sought a declaratory judgment that § 18-622 conflicted with, and was preempted by, the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), 42 U.S.C. § 1395dd, in situations where an abortion is necessary stabilizing treatment for an emergency medical condition, and an order permanently enjoining the Idaho law to the extent it conflicted with EMTALA. Idaho passed § 18-622 after the Supreme Court overruled Roe v. Wade, in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization.

According to the DOJ complaint, EMTALA requires hospitals that receive federal Medicare funds to provide necessary stabilizing treatment to patients who arrive at their emergency departments while experiencing a medical emergency. When a physician reasonably determines that the necessary stabilizing treatment is an abortion, state law cannot prohibit the provision of that care. The federal statute defines necessary stabilizing treatment to include all treatment needed to ensure that a patient will not have her health placed in serious jeopardy, have her bodily functions seriously impaired, or suffer serious dysfunction of any bodily organ or part.

Idaho's § 18-622 authorized prosecutors to prosecute a physician merely by showing that an abortion has been performed, without regard to the circumstances. A physician who provides an abortion in Idaho could ultimately avoid criminal liability by establishing as an affirmative defense that “the abortion was necessary to prevent the death of the pregnant woman.” But the state law provided no defense for an abortion necessary to protect the health of the pregnant patient.

The case was assigned to District Judge Barry Lynn Winmill. On August 8, 2022 the DOJ moved for a preliminary injunction prohibiting enforcement of Idaho Code § 18-622 as applied to EMTALA-mandated care. That same day the Idaho State Legislature moved to intervene as defendants. Judge Winmill granted in part and denied in part the Legislature’s motion. Judge Winmill found that the Legislature could not intervene as a matter of right, since it did not show it sought to voice a different perspective than Idaho, or that Idaho would not adequately represent the Legislature's interests. However, Judge Winmill allowed the Legislature to intervene for the limited purpose of opposing the DOJ’s motion for preliminary injunction. The Legislature's participation was limited to presenting evidence and argument aimed at showing the alleged holes in the factual foundation of the DOJ’s motion. 342 F.R.D. 144.

On August 17, 2022 Judge Winmill denied the Legislature’s request for an evidentiary hearing. Judge Winmill found the declarations on file provided a sufficient basis to make an informed decision and the bulk of the alleged factual dispute was actually a legal dispute: the meaning of Idaho Code § 18-622 and its overlap with EMTALA. 2022 WL 3442500.

On August 24, 2022 Judge Winmill granted the DOJ’s preliminary injunction. Judge Winmill found it was not possible for healthcare workers to simultaneously comply with their obligations under EMTALA and Idaho Code § 18-622. The state law therefore had to yield to federal law under the Supremacy Clause. Even if it was possible to comply with both laws, Idaho Code § 18-622 stood as a clear obstacle to what Congress was attempting to accomplish with EMTALA. Idaho Code § 18-622 would deter physicians from providing abortions in some emergency situations while EMTALA intended to ensure emergency care for patients in Medicare-funded hospitals.

The injunction restrained Idaho from enforcing Idaho Code § 18-622 as applied to medical care required by EMTALA. Idaho was prohibited from initiating any criminal prosecution against, attempting to suspend or revoke the professional license of, or seeking to impose any other form of liability on, any medical provider or hospital based on their performance of conduct that is defined as an “abortion” under Idaho Code § 18-604(1), but that is necessary to avoid (i) “placing the health of” a pregnant patient “in serious jeopardy”; (ii) a “serious impairment to bodily functions” of the pregnant patient; or (iii) a “serious dysfunction of any bodily organ or part” of the pregnant patient. The preliminary injunction was effective immediately through the date on which judgment would be entered on the case. 623 F.Supp.3d 1096.

In September 2022, the Legislature and Idaho moved for reconsideration of the preliminary injunction. The court subsequently stayed issuance of a decision until the resolution of this motion. In the interim, on October 4, 2022, the Legislature renewed its motion to intervene. On February 3, 2023, the court denied the Legislature's motion, holding that the Legislature and the State's interests overlapped fully such that the State would adequately represent the Legislature's interests. 2023 WL 1767387. On March 2, the Legislature appealed to the Ninth Circuit (23-35153).

While the Legislature's appeal was pending, the lower court denied the State's motion for reconsideration of the preliminary injunction on May 4, 2023. The court considered the Idaho Supreme Court's January 2023 upholding of § 18-622 under the Idaho Constitution in Planned Parenthood Great Northwest v. State of Idaho , but concluded that the Planned Parenthood decision did not negate the fundamental principles underpinning this court's preliminary injunction. The preliminary injunction in this case did not rest on whether the abortion ban was consistent with the Idaho Constitution, but rather whether it conflicted with EMTALA. 2023 WL 3284977.

On June 28, 2023, Idaho appealed the initial order on motion for preliminary injunction and the order on motion for reconsideration to the Ninth Circuit (23-35440). On July 3, the Legislature also appealed the order on motion for reconsideration (23-35450). That same day, the Legislature also moved to stay the preliminary injunction pending appeal. On September 28, the Ninth Circuit granted that motion, staying the preliminary injunction pending appeal. It explained that the Idaho law likely did not conflict with EMTALA, that the preliminary injunction directly harmed Idaho's sovereignty, and that the balance of the equities and the public interest favored Idaho's right to enforce its legitimately enacted laws during the pendency of the appeal. 83 F.4th 1130. Separately, the Ninth Circuit also consolidated 23-35440 and 23-35450.

On September 30, 2023, the United States filed an emergency motion for reconsideration en banc of the stay pending appeal. On October 10, per a vote of the majority of nonrecused active judges, the Ninth Circuit ordered the matter be reheard en banc and vacated the stay. 82 F.4th 1296. On November 13, the Ninth Circuit denied the motion to stay, and therefore allowed the district court's injunction to remain in effect while the appeal was pending. 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 30135. While the appeals were pending, many states and municipalities submitted amicus briefs to the Ninth Circuit.

On November 20, 2023, both the Legislature (23-726) and Idaho (23-727) separately applied to the Supreme Court for a stay of the district court's preliminary injunction. On January 3, the Idaho Acting Solicitor General notified the Supreme Court of the Fifth Circuit's recent opinion in Texas v. Becerra , which upheld a permanent injunction of federal guidance which had advised that EMTALA required abortions to be provided in emergency situations, even in jurisdictions with abortion bans. Two days later, the Supreme Court granted the application for stay, treated the application as a petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment, and granted the petition. In response, the Ninth Circuit stayed its proceedings regarding its consideration of the preliminary injunction pending a decision by the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court heard arguments in April 2024. On June 27, 2024, however, the Court issued a per curiam opinion, dismissing the case as improvidently granted and vacating the January 5 stay. The preliminary injunction was thus reinstated, and hospitals were able to perform emergency abortions in the state while the litigation continued in the lower courts.

Justice Kagan concurred, joined by Justice Sotomayor (and joined in part by Justice Jackson), stating that “Idaho’s arguments about EMTALA do not justify, and have never justified, either emergency relief or our early consideration of this dispute,” and that dismissing the case would allow the regular course of litigation in the lower courts. Justice Barrett also concurred, joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Kavanaugh, because the “shape of the [case]” had “substantially shifted” since the Court granted cert, and because the parties’ positions had continued to evolve. Justice Jackson concurred in part and dissented in part, agreeing that the stay should have been lifted but asserting that the Court was wrong to dismiss the case as improvidently granted, and even suggesting that the Court used this procedural move to avoid an issue it did not wish to decide. Justice Alito dissented, joined by Justice Thomas and in part by Justice Gorsuch, stating that the Court’s “about-face is baffling,” because nothing “legally relevant” had occurred to change the circumstances of the case since the Court granted cert. Justice Alito offered an interpretation of EMTALA in his dissent, asserting that it did not require covered hospitals to perform abortions in violation of Idaho state law, but instead required hospitals to protect an “unborn child” from harm.

	Document
1 1:22-cv-00329	Complaint United States of America v. The State of Idaho	Aug. 2, 2022	Aug. 2, 2022 Complaint
27 1:22-cv-00329	Memorandum Decision and Order	Aug. 13, 2022	Aug. 13, 2022 Order/Opinion 342 F.R.D. 144
73 1:22-cv-00329	Memorandum Decision and Order	Aug. 17, 2022	Aug. 17, 2022 Order/Opinion 2022 WL 3442500
95 1:22-cv-00329	Memorandum Decision and Order	Aug. 24, 2022	Aug. 24, 2022 Order/Opinion 623 F.Supp.3d 1096
125 1:22-cv-00329	Memorandum Decision and Order	Feb. 3, 2023	Feb. 3, 2023 Order/Opinion 2023 WL 1767387
135 1:22-cv-00329	Memorandum Decision and Order	May 4, 2023	May 4, 2023 Order/Opinion 2023 WL 3284977
153 1:22-cv-00329	Order United States v. Idaho U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit	Oct. 2, 2023	Oct. 2, 2023 Order/Opinion 83 F.4th 1130
23-00726	SCOTUS Opinion Supreme Court of the United States	June 27, 2024	June 27, 2024 Order/Opinion 144 S.Ct. 2015

ECF Number	Description	Date	Link Date / Link
1	COMPLAINT against State of Idaho, filed by The United States. (Attachments: # 1 Cover Sheet, # 2 Cover Sheet Counsel attachment, # 3 Summons)(Newman, Lisa) (Attachment 1 cover sheet replaced with PDF that cannot be edited on 8/3/2022) (ac). 1 Cover Sheet View on PACER 2 Cover Sheet Counsel attachment View on PACER 3 Summons View on PACER	Aug. 2, 2022	Aug. 2, 2022 Clearinghouse
2	NOTICE of Appearance by Anna Lynn Deffebach on behalf of All Plaintiffs (Deffebach, Anna)	Aug. 2, 2022	Aug. 2, 2022 PACER
3	NOTICE of Appearance by Julie Straus Harris on behalf of The United States (Straus Harris, Julie)	Aug. 2, 2022	Aug. 2, 2022 PACER
4	Summons Issued as to State of Idaho. (Print attached Summons for service.) (ac)	Aug. 3, 2022	Aug. 3, 2022 PACER
5	NOTICE of Appearance by Daniel Schwei on behalf of United States of America (Schwei, Daniel)	Aug. 4, 2022	Aug. 4, 2022 PACER
6	SUMMONS Returned Executed by United States of America. State of Idaho served on 8/2/2022, answer due 8/23/2022. (Newman, Lisa)	Aug. 4, 2022	Aug. 4, 2022 PACER
7	NOTICE of Appearance by Christopher A. Eiswerth on behalf of United States of America (Eiswerth, Christopher)	Aug. 4, 2022	Aug. 4, 2022 PACER
8	NOTICE of Appearance by Emily Nestler on behalf of United States of America (Nestler, Emily)	Aug. 4, 2022	Aug. 4, 2022 PACER
9	NOTICE of Appearance by Megan Ann Larrondo on behalf of State of Idaho (Larrondo, Megan)	Aug. 4, 2022	Aug. 4, 2022 PACER
10	NOTICE of Appearance by Brian David Netter on behalf of United States of America (Netter, Brian)	Aug. 5, 2022	Aug. 5, 2022 PACER
11	NOTICE of Availability of Magistrate Judge and Requirement for Consent sent to counsel for State of Idaho, United States of America re 1 Complaint, 9 Notice of Appearance Consent/Objection to Magistrate due by 10/4/2022. (alw)	Aug. 5, 2022	Aug. 5, 2022 RECAP
12	NOTICE of Appearance by Steven Lamar Olsen on behalf of State of Idaho (Olsen, Steven)	Aug. 5, 2022	Aug. 5, 2022 PACER
13	DOCKET ENTRY ORDER: In accordance with the agreement reached by the parties and discussed with the Court at an informal status conference, the following briefing schedule is ordered. The United States will file its motion for injunctive relief on Monday, August 8. The State of Idaho will file its response on Tuesday, August 16. The United States will file its reply brief by 12:00 pm MDT on Friday, August 19. The Court will have a hearing on the motion, which will be set by separate notice, on August 22. Signed by Judge B Lynn Winmill. (hgp)	Aug. 5, 2022	Aug. 5, 2022 PACER
21	Docket Text Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge B Lynn Winmill: A Status Conference was held via Zoom on 8/5/2022. Appearing on behalf of Plaintiff: Lisa Newman, Daniel Schwei, and Brian Netter. Appearing on behalf of Defendant: Megan Larrondo and Steve Olsen. The Court discussed a briefing schedule regarding Plaintiff's motion for injunctive relief (see Dkt. 13). Hearing was held informally and was not recorded. Time: 1:04-1:14p.m. (jlg) (Entered: 08/10/2022)	Aug. 5, 2022	Aug. 5, 2022 PACER
14	ORDER. An amicus curiae supporting the United States of America must file its brief, accompanied by a motion for filing, no later than August 15, 2022. An amicus curiae supporting the State of Idaho must file its brief, accompanied by a motion for filing, no later than 12:00 MDT on August 19, 2022. An amicus curiae that does not support either party must file its brief no later than no later than 12:00 MDT on August 19, 2022. Signed by Judge B Lynn Winmill. (alw)	Aug. 8, 2022	Aug. 8, 2022 RECAP
15	Expedited MOTION to Intervene Daniel W. Bower, Monte N Stewart appearing for Intervenor Defendant Speaker of the Idaho House of Representatives Scott Bedke, Idaho Senate President Pro Tempore Chuck Winder, and the Sixty-Sixth Idaho Legislature. Responses due by 8/29/2022 (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support of Motion to Intervene, # 2 Exhibit 1 Proposed Answer)(Bower, Daniel) 1 Memorandum in Support of Motion to Intervene View on RECAP 2 Exhibit 1 Proposed Answer View on RECAP	Aug. 8, 2022	Aug. 8, 2022 RECAP
16	MOTION to Expedite Idaho Legislatures Motion to Intervene Daniel W. Bower appearing for Intervenor Defendant Speaker of the Idaho House of Representatives Scott Bedke, Idaho Senate President Pro Tempore Chuck Winder, and the Sixty-Sixth Idaho Legislature. Responses due by 8/29/2022 (Bower, Daniel)	Aug. 8, 2022	Aug. 8, 2022 RECAP
17	MOTION for Preliminary Injunction Lisa Newman appearing for Plaintiff United States of America. Responses due by 8/29/2022 (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Proposed Order, # 3 Ex. A, Fleisher Declaration, # 4 Fleisher Appendix, Pt. 1, # 5 Fleisher Appendix, Pt. 2, # 6 Ex. B, Corrigan Declaration, # 7 Ex. C, Cooper Declaration, # 8 Ex. D, Seyb Declaration, # 9 Ex. E, Wright Declaration, # 10 Ex. F, Shadle Declaration, # 11 Ex. G, Newman Declaration, # 12 Newman Appendix, Pt. 1, # 13 Newman Appendix, Pt. 2)(Newman, Lisa) 1 Memorandum in Support View on RECAP 2 Proposed Order View on RECAP 3 Ex. A, Fleisher Declaration View on RECAP 4 Fleisher Appendix, Pt. 1 View on RECAP 5 Fleisher Appendix, Pt. 2 View on RECAP 6 Ex. B, Corrigan Declaration View on RECAP 7 Ex. C, Cooper Declaration View on RECAP 8 Ex. D, Seyb Declaration View on RECAP 9 Ex. E, Wright Declaration View on RECAP 10 Ex. F, Shadle Declaration View on RECAP 11 Ex. G, Newman Declaration View on RECAP 12 Newman Appendix, Pt. 1 View on RECAP 13 Newman Appendix, Pt. 2 View on RECAP	Aug. 8, 2022	Aug. 8, 2022 RECAP
18	DOCKET ENTRY ORDER: The parties shall respond to the motion to intervene (Dkt. 15 ) by Wednesday, August 10, 2022. Signed by Judge B Lynn Winmill. (hgp)	Aug. 9, 2022	Aug. 9, 2022 PACER
19	AMENDED ORDER re 14 Order. Signed by Judge B Lynn Winmill. (alw)	Aug. 9, 2022	Aug. 9, 2022 RECAP
20	NOTICE by State of Idaho re 15 Expedited MOTION to Intervene State of Idaho's Non-Opposition (Larrondo, Megan)	Aug. 10, 2022	Aug. 10, 2022 RECAP
22	DOCKET ENTRY NOTICE OF HEARING regarding 17 Motion for Preliminary Injunction: A Motion Hearing is set for 8/22/2022 at 9:30 AM in Boise - Courtroom 2 before Judge B Lynn Winmill. (jlg)	Aug. 10, 2022	Aug. 10, 2022 PACER
23	RESPONSE to Motion re 15 Expedited MOTION to Intervene filed by United States of America. Replies due by 8/24/2022.(Deffebach, Anna)	Aug. 10, 2022	Aug. 10, 2022 RECAP
24	DOCKET ENTRY ORDER: If the Idaho Legislature wishes to file its optional reply brief in support of its motion to intervene (filed at Dkt. 15), it must do so by 5:00 p.m. Mountain Time today, August 11, 2022. Signed by Judge B Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (mls)	Aug. 11, 2022	Aug. 11, 2022 PACER
25	REPLY to Response to Motion re 15 Expedited MOTION to Intervene filed by Speaker of the Idaho House of Representatives Scott Bedke, Idaho Senate President Pro Tempore Chuck Winder, and the Sixty-Sixth Idaho Legislature.Motion Ripe Deadline set for 8/12/2022.(Bower, Daniel)	Aug. 11, 2022	Aug. 11, 2022 RECAP
26	NOTICE of Appearance by Brian V Church on behalf of State of Idaho (Church, Brian)	Aug. 12, 2022	Aug. 12, 2022 PACER
27	MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 15 Motion to Intervene. Signed by Judge B Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (mls)	Aug. 13, 2022	Aug. 13, 2022 Clearinghouse
28	DOCKET ENTRY ORDER: The Court amends its oral order, made during the informal status conference today, as follows: The Legislature's deadline for submitting affidavits in supports of its response shall be due by 12:00 p.m., Mountain Time, on Wednesday, August 17, 2022. The Legislature's deadline to submit its brief opposing the United States Motion for Preliminary Injunction shall remain the same: that brief is due on August 16, 2022. Signed by Judge B Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (mls)	Aug. 15, 2022	Aug. 15, 2022 PACER
29	AMENDED DOCKET ENTRY NOTICE OF HEARING regarding 17 Motion for Preliminary Injunction: The Motion Hearing set for 8/22/2022 is rescheduled to begin at 9:00 AM in Boise - Courtroom 2 before Judge B Lynn Winmill. (jlg)	Aug. 15, 2022	Aug. 15, 2022 PACER
30	Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge B Lynn Winmill: Video Status Conference was held on 8/15/2022. (Court Reporter Tammy Hohenleitner.) (jlg)	Aug. 15, 2022	Aug. 15, 2022 RECAP
31	NOTICE of Appearance by Joan Elizabeth Callahan on behalf of State of Idaho (Callahan, Joan)	Aug. 15, 2022	Aug. 15, 2022 PACER
32	MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE APPEARANCE by Laura Etlinger. ( Filing fee $ 250 receipt number AIDDC-2435922.)Laura Etlinger appearing for Amicus Parties New York, State of, California, State of, Connecticut, State of, Colorado, State of, Delaware, State of, Hawaii, State of, Illinois, State of, Maine, State of, Maryland, State of, Massachusetts, State of, Michigan, State of, Minnesota, State of, Nevada, State of, New Jersey, State of, New Mexico, State of, North Carolina, State of, Oregon, State of, Pennsylvania, State of, Rhode Island, State of, Washington, State of, Washington DC. Responses due by 9/6/2022 (Etlinger, Laura)	Aug. 15, 2022	Aug. 15, 2022 PACER
33	MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE APPEARANCE by Jay Alan Sekulow. ( Filing fee $ 250 receipt number AIDDC-2436019.)Jay Alan Sekulow appearing for Amicus American Center for Law & Justice. Responses due by 9/6/2022 (Sekulow, Jay)	Aug. 15, 2022	Aug. 15, 2022 RECAP
34	MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE APPEARANCE by Jordan A. Sekulow. ( Filing fee $ 250 receipt number AIDDC-2436031.)Jordan A. Sekulow appearing for Amicus American Center for Law & Justice. Responses due by 9/6/2022 (Sekulow, Jordan)	Aug. 15, 2022	Aug. 15, 2022 PACER
35	MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE APPEARANCE by Stuart J. Roth. ( Filing fee $ 250 receipt number AIDDC-2436050.)Stuart Roth appearing for Amicus American Center for Law & Justice. Responses due by 9/6/2022 (Roth, Stuart)	Aug. 15, 2022	Aug. 15, 2022 PACER
36	MEMORANDUM/BRIEF filed by United States of America Regarding Live Testimony at August 22 Preliminary Injunction Hearing. (Schwei, Daniel)	Aug. 15, 2022	Aug. 15, 2022 RECAP
37	MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE APPEARANCE by Olivia F. Summers. ( Filing fee $ 250 receipt number AIDDC-2436080.)Olivia F. Summers appearing for Amicus American Center for Law & Justice. Responses due by 9/6/2022 (Summers, Olivia)	Aug. 15, 2022	Aug. 15, 2022 RECAP
38	DOCKET ENTRY ORDER approving 32 Motion for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of attorney Laura Etlinger for California, State of,Laura Etlinger for Colorado, State of,Laura Etlinger for Connecticut, State of,Laura Etlinger for Delaware, State of,Laura Etlinger for Hawaii, State of,Laura Etlinger for Illinois, State of,Laura Etlinger for Maine, State of,Laura Etlinger for Maryland, State of,Laura Etlinger for Massachusetts, State of,Laura Etlinger for Michigan, State of,Laura Etlinger for Minnesota, State of,Laura Etlinger for Nevada, State of,Laura Etlinger for New Jersey, State of,Laura Etlinger for New Mexico, State of,Laura Etlinger for New York, State of,Laura Etlinger for North Carolina, State of,Laura Etlinger for Oregon, State of,Laura Etlinger for Pennsylvania, State of,Laura Etlinger for Rhode Island, State of,Laura Etlinger for Washington DC,Laura Etlinger for Washington, State of Per Local Rule 83.4(e), out-of-state counsel shall immediately register for ECF. (Notice sent to CM/ECF Registration Clerk) (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (alw)	Aug. 15, 2022	Aug. 15, 2022 PACER
39	MOTION for Leave to File Brief as Amici Curiae Wendy Olson appearing for Amicus The American Hospital Association and The Association of American Medical Colleges. Responses due by 9/6/2022 (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Ex. A to Motion for Leave to File Brief of Amici Curiae)(Olson, Wendy) Modified on 8/16/2022 to change party filed name (alw). 1 Exhibit Ex. A to Motion for Leave to File Brief of Amici Curiae View on RECAP	Aug. 15, 2022	Aug. 15, 2022 PACER
40	MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE APPEARANCE by Amanda K. Rice. ( Filing fee $ 250 receipt number AIDDC-2436111.)Wendy Olson appearing for Amicus The American Hospital Association and The Association of American Medical Colleges. Responses due by 9/6/2022 (Olson, Wendy) Modified on 8/16/2022 to change filing party name (alw).	Aug. 15, 2022	Aug. 15, 2022 PACER

Case: United States v. State of Idaho

1:22-cv-00329 | U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho

Case Summary

Related Cases

People

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Docket

Case Details