OPINION: Attorney General Labrador can’t seem to resist conflicts of interest
Attorney General Labrador is embroiled once more in a conflict-of-interest lawsuit. He is now accused of using his position to bias voters against Proposition One, the initiative designed to strike Idaho’s total abortion ban. The proponents of the initiative took him to court last year, claiming he had written deceptive ballot titles for the initiative. The Idaho Supreme Court ruled that the short title was improper and ordered Labrador to revise it. He is now accused of misleading voters with confusing language about the effect of their vote.
Regardless of how the Court rules, the crux of the problem is Labrador’s glaring conflict of interest. His primary objective in office has been to rack up political points by trying to stamp out abortion in every form. He fought against a federal law requiring emergency care for pregnant women in crisis. He fought to criminalize doctors who refer women out of state to obtain abortion care. That did not end well because after two years of litigation, he agreed he was wrong. The State had to pay $400,000 in attorney fees for his obstinance. He teamed up with a Christian Nationalist group, Alliance Defending Freedom, in a Texas lawsuit to ban Mifepristone and Misoprostol, two drugs used for early termination of a pregnancy. That suit was dismissed for being filed in the wrong state, so he joined a similar suit in Missouri to limit Mifepristone.
Become a Subscriber!
You have read all of your free articles this month. Select a plan below to start your subscription today.
Already a subscriber? Login
