US Supreme Court skeptical about emergency abortion protection

The majority of the judges of the Supreme Court of USA They were skeptical this Wednesday during a hearing about whether a federal law can protect the lives of pregnant people when they are at risk of dying or whether, on the contrary, state laws that completely prohibit pregnancy should prevail. abortion.

Since in June 2022 the highest US court eliminated federal protection for abortion by annulling the ruling ‘Roe v. Wade’dozens of conservative states have carried out a frontal attack on women’s rights by implementing restrictive anti-abortion laws.

That same year, the Administration of current US President Joe Biden sued the state of Idaho – where abortion is prohibited at all stages of pregnancy – alleging that the restrictions on this procedure, in part, are regulated by federal law and that cannot be intervened when it comes to saving the lives of pregnant people.

To defend this position, the 40-year-old Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) was invoked, which requires hospitals that receive federal funds to provide emergency medical care to anyone, including for reproductive issues.

However, this interpretation of EMTALA was rejected by the conservative justices, who constitute the majority of the court, considering that the federal government cannot force private hospitals that receive federal funds to violate a state’s own law.

On the other hand, the three progressive judges did support that the emergency care law prevails over Idaho’s prohibition in cases where the lives of pregnant women are at stake.

So, after hearing oral arguments for nearly two hours, the Supreme Court will have to decide how far state bans can be extended in cases of medical emergencies, and is expected to announce its decision in June.

This hearing brought hundreds of protesters to the courthouse in favor of protecting reproductive health rights, including Marilyn Frankgub, a woman who drove 15 hours alone from Wisconsin “to protect the rights of women.”

“It seems like we are going back to the 1950s, people are going to die if they cannot have an abortion even in emergency cases”lamented to EFE from the middle of the crowd, who waved banners that read phrases like “we stay safe.”

Apart from the call supported by organizations such as Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), a small anti-abortion group also attended the doors of the Supreme Court, separated from the call in favor of voluntary termination of pregnancy by a fence .

“You don’t care if women die. “They want to intimidate us, but they are liars,” the president and director of the non-profit organization Reproductive Freedom For All, Mini Timmaraju, reproached them from a stage in front of the court.

Regarding this case, the director of the Women’s Initiative at the Center for American Progress (CAP), Sabrina Talukder, told EFE that “Idaho now already has a high maternal mortality rate” due to the lack of facilities, so he hopes that EMTALA coverage can cover at least emergency abortions.

In the middle of an election year, abortion has become one of the main points of friction between Democrats and Republicans and there are more than one legal battles over its access about which there are questions, since a ruling on the future is also expected in June of the use of the abortion pill in the country.

It may interest you