In response to the U.S. Department of Justice’splans to drop United States v. Idaho, its lawsuit which would upholdEMTALA, a federal law ensuring that patients can access to emergency services, including abortion where needed, to stabilize a patient regardless of a person’s ability to pay, the following quote is attributable toPayal Shah, JD, director of research, legal, and advocacy at Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) and co-author ofPHR’s amicus curiae brief filed in the case:
“The Trump administration’s decision to drop the Department of Justice’s case against Idaho places pregnant patients seeking emergency medical care in the state at risk of grave harms, including deaths.
“St. Lukes, the largest health system in Idaho, obtained a court order that allows enforcement of EMTALA for the time being. But if that order goes away, we will see a repeat of what PHR documented last year when Idaho’s law was briefly allowed to go into effect by the Supreme Court: Doctors will not be able to help women suffering from life-threatening conditions like PPROM and HELLP/preeclampsia. Care will be denied until patients are on brink of death. Patients will be transferred at their own cost and at great risk, including being airlifted to other states. Clinicians and health systems will be further undermined and attacked, made to choose between evidence-based, ethical care and obedience to unjust, harmful laws.
“The federal law EMTALA is clear: Emergency departments must ensure patients can access life-saving and stabilizing health care without discrimination, including abortion care, despite any state-level bans on abortion procedures. However, with these moves the Trump administration is signaling that politicians rather than doctors can decide who can receive live-saving care during medical emergencies.
“PHR has documented the dire impacts of abortion bans on patients and providers in ban-states like Idaho, Florida, Louisiana, and Oklahoma – including on patients seeking care during medical emergencies. Based on that evidence PHR filed an amicus curiae brief to the U.S. Supreme Court last year when it chose to take up the question of EMTALA in Idaho v. United States. During oral arguments, Supreme Court Justice Jackson cited PHR’s amicus while speaking to the myriad harms of state abortion bans.
“EMTALA saves lives and helps clinicians uphold medical ethics. By refusing to enforce this long-established federal law, the Trump administration is putting lives at risk and exposing clinicians to even greater risks of prosecution and penalty for providing life-saving care.”
Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) is a New York-based advocacy organization that uses science and medicine to prevent mass atrocities and severe human rights violations. Learn more here.