Bennet, Hickenlooper, Colleagues Urge Federal Court to Protect Access to Emergency Abortions

Denver - Colorado U.S. Senators Michael Bennet and John Hickenlooper, alongside 258 members of Congress, submitted an amicus brief to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit calling on the court to require Medicare-funded hospitals to provide life-saving care that may include abortion care. The court is considering Moyle v. United States and Idaho v. United States which concern the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), a federal law that requires hospitals that receive Medicare funding to provide necessary "stabilizing treatment" to patients experiencing medical emergencies, which can include abortion care.

""[T]he 99th Congress passed EMTALA to ensure that every person who visits a Medicare-funded hospital with an 'emergency medical condition' is offered stabilizing treatment," wrote Bennet, Hickenlooper, and the lawmakers.

After the Dobbs v. Jackson decision in 2022, Idaho passed a law making it a felony for a doctor to terminate a patient's pregnancy unless it is "necessary" to prevent the patient's death. The U.S. Department of Justice sued Idaho, arguing that the state's law is preempted by EMTALA in those circumstances in which abortion may not be necessary to prevent imminent death, but still constitutes the necessary stabilizing treatment for a patient's emergency medical condition. The district court agreed; however, Idaho appealed that ruling to the Supreme Court.

In their brief, the lawmakers ask the Ninth Circuit to uphold the district court's ruling. They argue that the congressional intent, text, and history of EMTALA make clear that covered hospitals must provide abortion care when it's necessary to stabilize a patient's emergency medical condition, and that EMTALA preempts Idaho's abortion ban in emergency situations that present a serious threat to a patient's health.

"Congress chose broad language for that mandate, requiring hospitals that participate in the Medicare program to provide 'such treatment as may be required to stabilize the medical condition.'… That text-untouched by Congress for the past three decades-makes clear that in situations in which a doctor determines that abortion constitutes the '[n]ecessary stabilizing treatment' for a pregnant patient, federal law requires the hospital to offer it," continued the lawmakers.

In March, Bennet and 257 of his colleagues filed an amicus brief asking the U.S. Supreme Court to affirm the district court decision. In June, the Supreme Court sent the case back to the Ninth Circuit Court and reinstated the district court's injunction.

The full text of the amicus brief is available HERE.