Supreme Court Refuses To Hear Emergency Abortion Rule Appeal

“Any state laws or mandates that employ a more restrictive definition of an emergency medical condition are preempted by the EMTALA statute,” the HHS notice stated, reinforcing the federal government’s stance that life-saving abortion care should not be obstructed by state restrictions.

However, Texas, which has one of the nation’s strictest abortion bans, pushed back. The state argued that its law already includes a life-threatening exception, though critics argue that the language of the law is dangerously vague. Texas sued the Biden administration, claiming that federal guidance was unnecessary and infringed upon the state’s ability to regulate abortion.

A lower federal court sided with Texas, ruling that the Biden administration had overstepped its authority. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that decision earlier this year, blocking the HHS guidance from being applied in Texas.

Doctors and medical professionals have expressed concern over the lack of clarity in Texas’s abortion law, fearing potential legal repercussions for providing necessary care. “There has been a spike in complaints that pregnant women in medical distress have been turned away from emergency rooms in Texas and elsewhere,” the Texas Tribune reported, underscoring the real-world consequences of the vague exceptions in the law. Physicians are now reluctant to perform procedures that have long been standard in treating severe pregnancy complications, such as sepsis or organ failure, out of fear of violating Texas’s ban.