What is the federal law at the center of the Supreme Court’s latest abortion case? (2024)

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court appears ready to rule that hospitals in Idaho may provide medically necessary abortions to stabilize patients at least for now, despite the state’s strict abortion law, according to a copy of the opinion that was briefly posted on Wednesday to the court’s website and obtained by Bloomberg News.

The document suggests that a 6-3 ruling from the court will reinstate a lower court’s order to allow Idaho emergency rooms to provide abortions that save a woman’s health as the broader legal case plays out.

The Justice Department had sued Idaho over its abortion law, which allows a woman to get an abortion only when her life — not her health — is at risk. Idaho doctors say they were unable to provide the stabilizing treatment the federal law requires and that is typically standard of care, prompting them to airlift at least a half-dozen pregnant patients to other states since Idaho’s law took effect in January.

But attorneys for Idaho have said their state law allows for women in dire circumstances to get an abortion and is not in conflict with the federal law.

The federal law, called the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, or EMTALA, requires doctors to stabilize or treat any patient who shows up at an emergency room.

Here’s a look at the history of EMTALA, what rights it provides patients and how a Supreme Court ruling might change that.

What protections does EMTALA provide patients at an ER?

The law requires emergency rooms to offer a medical exam if you turn up at their facility. The law applies to nearly all emergency rooms — any that accept Medicare funding.

Those emergency rooms are required to stabilize patients if they do have a medical emergency before discharging or transferring them. And if the ER doesn’t have the resources or staff to properly treat that patient, staff members are required to arrange a medical transfer to another hospital, after they’ve confirmed the facility can accept the patient.

So, for example, if a pregnant woman shows up at an emergency room concerned that she is in labor but there is not an OB-GYN on staff who could deliver her baby, hospital staff cannot simply direct the woman to go elsewhere.

Why was this law created?

Look to Chicago in the early 1980s.

Doctors at the city’s public hospital were confronting a huge problem: Thousands of patients, many of them Black or Latino, were arriving in very bad condition — and they were sent there by private hospitals in the city that refused to treat them. Some were gunshot victims who hadn’t been stabilized. Most of them did not have health insurance.

Chicago wasn’t alone. Doctors working in public hospitals around the country reported similar issues. Media reports, including one of a pregnant woman who delivered a stillborn baby after being turned away by two hospitals because she didn’t have insurance, intensified public pressure on politicians to act.

Congress drafted legislation with Republican Sen. David Durenberger of Minnesota saying at the time, “Americans, rich or poor, deserve access to quality health care. This question of access should be the government’s responsibility at the federal, state, and local levels.”

Then-President Ronald Reagan, a Republican, signed the bill into law in 1986.

What happens if a hospital turns away a patient?

The hospital is investigated by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. If they find the hospital violated a patient’s right to care, they can lose their Medicare funding, a vital source of revenue needed for most hospitals to keep their doors open.

Usually, however, the federal government issues fines when a hospital violates EMTALA. They can add up to hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Why did the Supreme Court look at the law?

Since the Supreme Court overturned the constitutional right to an abortion, President Joe Biden, a Democrat, has repeatedly reminded hospitals that his administration considers an abortion part of the stabilizing care that EMTALA requires facilities to provide.

The Biden administration argues that Idaho’s law prevents ER doctors from offering an abortion if a woman needs one in a medical emergency.

But Idaho’s attorney general has pointed out that EMTALA also requires hospitals to consider the health of the “unborn child” in its treatment, too. Attorneys for Idaho have also said that there’s no conflict between the state and federal law since Idaho allows doctors to perform an abortion if the woman’s life is at stake.

What are the advocates saying?

Anti-abortion advocates argue that state laws banning abortion can coexist with the federal law that requires hospitals to stabilize pregnant patients in an emergency.

The prominent anti-abortion group Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America has called the lawsuit in Idaho a “PR stunt.”

“The EMTALA case is based on the false premise that pregnant women cannot receive emergency care under pro-life laws,” said Kelsey Pritchard, the group’s state public affairs director after the case was heard earlier this year. “It is a clear fact that pregnant women can receive miscarriage care, ectopic pregnancy care and treatment in a medical emergency in all 50 states.”

But many doctors say it’s not as clear cut as anti-abortion advocates claim.

In rare cases, a woman may risk sepsis, hemorrhaging or reproductive organ loss if a troubled pregnancy is not terminated. But Idaho’s state law forces a doctor to wait until the patient is close enough to death to end a pregnancy, doctors argue.

Doctors risk a minimum two-year imprisonment for providing an abortion if the woman’s life is not at risk.

“There’s nothing worse than feeling as a physician that you know what the patient needs and you can’t get it for them,” Dr. Jessica Kroll, the president of the Idaho American College of Emergency Physicians told reporters during a press conference early this month.

What is the federal law at the center of the Supreme Court’s latest abortion case? (2024)

FAQs

What is the federal law at the center of the Supreme Court’s latest abortion case? ›

The law, called the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act or “EMTALA,” requires emergency rooms to offer a medical exam if you turn up at their facility.

What amendment is Roe v. Wade? ›

Roe held that the specific guarantee of “liberty” in the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which protects individual privacy, includes the right to abortion prior to fetal viability.

What was the defendant's argument in Roe v. Wade? ›

Jane Roe and the others involved based their case on the following arguments: The Texas law invaded an individual's right to "liberty" under the 14th Amendment. The Texas law infringed on rights to marital, familial, and sexual privacy guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.

Was Roe v. Wade a law? ›

What Is Roe v. Wade? Roe v. Wade is the U.S. Supreme Court case that legalized abortion in the United States in 1973. Safe, legal abortion remained a recognized federal constitutional right nationwide for nearly 50 years.

What is the significance of Roe v. Wade? ›

Roe rendered these laws unconstitutional, making abortion services vastly safer and more accessible to women throughout the country. The decision also set a legal precedent that affected more than 30 subsequent Supreme Court cases involving restrictions on access to abortion.

What are the effects of overturning Roe v. Wade? ›

Overturning Roe v. Wade has significant implications for medical and nursing education and will reshape the knowledge, skills, and quality of care provided by future physicians and nurses [33], particularly in states with bans on abortion or pregnancy age restrictions.

What does Amendment 9 mean in simple terms? ›

What does the 9th amendment mean in simple terms? The 9th Amendment means that the rights of citizens will be protected whether these rights are listed or not. It also leaves what rights are not listed as an opportunity for interpretation.

What is Roe vs Wade for dummies? ›

Roe versus Wade, better known as Roe v. Wade, is the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion within the first two months of pregnancy.

What did the plaintiff want in Roe v. Wade? ›

Roe alleged that she was unmarried and pregnant; that she wished to terminate her pregnancy by an abortion "performed by a competent, licensed physician, under safe, clinical conditions"; that she was unable to get a "legal" abortion in Texas because her life did not appear to be threatened by the continuation of her ...

What was the constitutional question in Roe v. Wade? ›

In Roe v. Wade, the Court ruled that a state law that banned abortions except to save the life of the mother was unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment. The decision has proven to be one of the most controversial cases in the Court's history.

What is protected under Roe v. Wade? ›

In Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decided that the right to privacy implied in the 14th Amendment protected abortion as a fundamental right. However, the government retained the power to regulate or restrict abortion access depending on the stage of pregnancy.

What was Roe's argument? ›

In her lawsuit, Roe alleged that the state laws were unconstitutionally vague and abridged her right of personal privacy, protected by the First, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments.

Why was Roe v. Wade a controversial case? ›

The decision struck down many abortion laws, and caused an ongoing abortion debate in the United States about whether, or to what extent, abortion should be legal, who should decide the legality of abortion, and what the role of moral and religious views in the political sphere should be.

Which of the following is true of the decision in Roe v. Wade? ›

Which of the following are true of the decision in Roe v. Wade? The Supreme Court decided that the right to privacy encompassed a right for women to terminate a pregnancy, at least under certain scenarios and/or during the first three months of pregnancy.

Which statement describes the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade? ›

Expert-Verified Answer. The correct option for the statement that describes the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade is B. It ruled that women's right to abortion was rooted in the language of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

What is the 14th Amendment in simple terms? ›

Passed by the Senate on June 8, 1866, and ratified two years later, on July 9, 1868, the Fourteenth Amendment granted citizenship to all persons "born or naturalized in the United States," including formerly enslaved people, and provided all citizens with “equal protection under the laws,” extending the provisions of ...

How does the 14th Amendment apply to a woman's right to privacy? ›

Wade, the Court used the right to privacy, as derived from the Fourteenth Amendment, and extended the right to encompass an individual's right to have an abortion: "This right of privacy . . . founded in the Fourteenth Amendment's concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action . . . is broad enough to ...

What is in the Equal Rights Amendment? ›

The text of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) states that “equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex” and further that “the Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.” The ERA was ...

How does the 5th Amendment protect abortion? ›

In 1973, the Supreme Court held that the Fifth Amendment's due process clause includes a right to privacy in Roe v. Wade – and that through this right of privacy, women have the right to choose to have an abortion. In Roe, the Supreme Court found that this right to privacy was rooted in the Fifth Amendment.

References

Top Articles
Latest Posts
Recommended Articles
Article information

Author: Msgr. Refugio Daniel

Last Updated:

Views: 5627

Rating: 4.3 / 5 (74 voted)

Reviews: 89% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Msgr. Refugio Daniel

Birthday: 1999-09-15

Address: 8416 Beatty Center, Derekfort, VA 72092-0500

Phone: +6838967160603

Job: Mining Executive

Hobby: Woodworking, Knitting, Fishing, Coffee roasting, Kayaking, Horseback riding, Kite flying

Introduction: My name is Msgr. Refugio Daniel, I am a fine, precious, encouraging, calm, glamorous, vivacious, friendly person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.