In the final session of the year, the Supreme Court is gearing up to address several key abortion-related cases, revealing the legal battlefronts emerging after the landmark decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. These cases touch on a range of issues, from Idaho's emergency request to enforce its abortion law to the availability of the common abortion pill, mifepristone. The outcome of these cases has the potential to shape the landscape of abortion rights for years to come.

One of the cases before the justices is Idaho's emergency request to fully enforce its abortion law. The ruling, which could come as early as this week, seeks to establish criminal penalties for doctors performing abortions, with exceptions only when the mother's life is at risk. Idaho's law has drawn attention and controversy, with the Biden administration challenging its legality.

Another case the justices are slated to consider is an appeal seeking to overturn a Supreme Court precedent that allows laws prohibiting anti-abortion activists from approaching individuals outside abortion clinics. This crucial issue will be discussed at the justices' conference this week and has significant implications for free speech and the First Amendment.

In addition, the Supreme Court will review the availability of mifepristone, the common abortion pill, which will be discussed in a closed-door conference on December 8. This case carries immense significance as it marks the highest-stakes abortion dispute since last year's decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, which rolled back decades of constitutional abortion protections. The question at hand is whether the FDA's regulations surrounding mifepristone, including dosage, mailing the medication to patients, and allowing providers other than physicians to prescribe it, are valid.

The Biden administration has appealed a ruling by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that upheld portions of a previous decision to limit mifepristone's usage, arguing that it would have detrimental consequences for women seeking lawful abortions. They question the propriety of the FDA's decisions concerning mifepristone over the years. On the other side, the plaintiffs represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom argue that the FDA's actions have been politically motivated and have overshadowed considerations of law, science, and safety.

Another issue before the Supreme Court is the matter of establishing abortion clinic "buffer zones." A previously decided case, Hill v. Colorado, permitted a Colorado law prohibiting anti-abortion activists from protesting or counseling within eight feet of individuals entering abortion clinics. With most of the justices who ruled on the case no longer on the bench, this precedent could be reconsidered. Justice Clarence Thomas, the only remaining justice from the original case, has long contended that Hill v. Colorado should be overruled. Joined by Justices Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett, Thomas believes the precedent is erroneous and has a "defunct status."

Additionally, the Supreme Court has been presented with an opportunity to revisit Hill v. Colorado through legislation passed by Westchester County, New York. This legislation restricts abortion clinic protests, and its legality is being challenged by Debra Vitagliano, a Catholic "sidewalk counselor." Backed by anti-abortion and religious freedom groups, Vitagliano urges the justices to overturn Hill and restore the public sidewalks as a space for peaceful exchange of information without fear of imprisonment.

Outside of the regular docket, the Supreme Court is considering an emergency application from Idaho officials regarding their abortion "trigger law" that came into effect after Roe v. Wade was overturned. This near-total ban on abortions imposes criminal penalties on doctors performing the procedure, except when the mother's life is at risk. The Biden administration has sued Idaho, arguing that the state law is preempted by federal law concerning emergency medical treatment. The outcome of this case and a similar ongoing case in Texas could have far-reaching effects on states' ability to enforce restrictive abortion laws.

The Supreme Court's deliberation on these abortion-related cases signifies the critical role it plays in shaping the future of reproductive rights in the United States. The decisions reached will impact the lives of countless women and the broader debate surrounding abortion. As the Court's final session of the year unfolds, all eyes will be on how the justices navigate these contentious legal battles.