Following this case, the CMS released guidance on how emergencies could supersede state law through EMTALA. This case upheld an act written by the Alliance Defending Freedom that cited the findings of Gonzales v. Carhart (0[2])as a basis for its regulations. (0[1])This case claims that “necessary” has meanings (0[1])from “essential” to “useful” and cites (20[1])the unworkability (0[1])of a previous case’s “undue burden” standard. (20[1])A concurrence to this case (0[2])stated that previous cases also based (0[1])on (*) substantive due process, like (10[1])Griswold, should be (10[1])evaluated. (10[3]0[3])Politico (0[1])leaked the draft (0[1])opinion (10[2])of this case, (10[1]0[2])which, upon (10[1])being (0[1])issued, (10[1])led to several (0[1])states’ “trigger (10[1])laws” being activated to establish “heartbeat” (10[1])bans. (0[1])For 10 points, (0[1])name this 2022 Supreme Court case that overturned (10[1]0[1])Roe v. Wade. (10[3]0[1])■END■ (10[9]0[3])