Supreme Court Declines to Hear Biden Administration’s Challenge in Texas Emergency Abortion Dispute
The Supreme Court has declined to hear the Biden Administration’s appeal that sought to overturn the decision of a lower court regarding emergency abortion care in Texas. The lower court ruled that the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) does not trump the abortion ban in Texas, and that decision still stands.
Since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, many states, including Texas, have introduced bans on abortions. Texas has some of the strictest laws in the country, prohibiting almost all abortions in the state. While Texas does have exceptions, such as allowing abortions to be legally provided to save the life of a mother or to prevent substantial impairment of major bodily function, the wording of the exceptions is such that life-threatening or harmful pregnancies are not necessarily excepted. Doctors in the state have said that abortions can only be provided when the life of a mother is clearly at risk, not when there is a risk of the mother losing her reproductive ability. Should an abortion be provided in the state when the mother is at risk of harm, doctors would be at risk of criminal prosecution.
The Biden Administration issued guidance in July 2022 confirming that EMTALA requires healthcare providers to provide stabilizing care to patients experiencing emergency medical conditions, and that emergency medical care may include abortion care in certain situations. Texas and two anti-abortion medical associations sued the Biden Administration over its guidance, alleging interference with the state’s right to restrict abortions. The lawsuit was successful, with the lower court blocking the enforcement of the guidance in Texas and against members of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists and the Christian Medical & Dental Associations. The Biden Administration appealed the ruling, but the lower court’s ruling was upheld by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Circuit Judge Kurt Engelhardt ruled against the Biden Administration, as while EMTALA requires healthcare providers to provide emergency care to save the life of a mother or prevent serious harm, EMTALA also requires healthcare providers to deliver an unborn child. Judge Engelhardt ruling meant it was up to doctors to balance the medical needs of the mother and fetus while complying with state laws. The Department of Justice sought to have the case heard by the Supreme Court; however, the Supreme court rejected the request without providing any explanation and returned the case to the lower courts for further proceedings, which means the lower court’s decision still stands.
Get The FREE
HIPAA Compliance Checklist
Immediate Delivery of Checklist Link To Your Email Address
Please Enter Correct Email Address
Your Privacy Respected
HIPAA Journal Privacy Policy
Earlier this year, the Supreme Court heard a similar case in Idaho – Moyle v. United States – where a similarly strict law has been enacted that bans and criminalizes most abortions. The state ban on abortions at all stages of pregnancy (with very limited exceptions) was enacted; however, the law is being challenged by the Biden Administration. In that Supreme Court case, there was a partial victory for the Biden Administration, with the Supreme Court narrowly allowing emergency abortions to continue while the state’s abortion restrictions are litigated.
