News Release:
Thursday, June 27, 2024
For Immediate Release
June 27, 2024
Media Contact: [email protected]
In Idaho and Moyle et al v. United States the Supreme Court had the opportunity to hold once and for all that pregnant people have the basic right to emergency care. Today the Court failed to do so, sending the case back to the lower courts. While the opinion temporarily restores the ability of doctors in Idaho to provide emergency abortions required under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), by dismissing Idaho’s appeal without resolving the core issues in the case, SCOTUS will only continue to put pregnant patients at unnecessary risk.
Idaho and Moyle et al v. United States is a case brought by extremist politicians seeking to disregard a federal statute — the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), that guarantees people receive treatment for emergency medical conditions. Anti-abortion extremists challenged the law’s application to abortion in an attempt to exclude pregnant people from EMTALA’s longstanding protections.
Leah Rutman, Health Policy Program Director for the ACLU of Washington, had the following statement:
“We know that the fight is far from over. EMTALA saves lives. It is a longstanding federal law that guarantees everyone the right to emergency medical care and, in many cases, abortion is the only care that will save a pregnant patient’s health and life. By not deciding the case on its merits, the Court has failed to protect pregnant patients.
Even if the Supreme Court’s decision provides a temporary reprieve, the chaos and confusion caused by abortion bans across the country will still prevent providers from providing appropriate medical care to their patients when they need it most.
Those who have attacked EMTALA are more concerned with imposing their personal beliefs as opposed to caring for the actual lives and health of pregnant people. This is part of a broader goal of banning abortion nationwide — even in states like ours where it is legal, and where we have passed laws that ensure it is provided as emergency care. Today’s decision is a reminder that we must continue to fight to protect and expand abortion access, in Washington and beyond.”
June 27, 2024
Media Contact: [email protected]
ACLU of Washington statement on Supreme Court ruling in Idaho v. United States and Moyle v. United States
In Idaho and Moyle et al v. United States the Supreme Court had the opportunity to hold once and for all that pregnant people have the basic right to emergency care. Today the Court failed to do so, sending the case back to the lower courts. While the opinion temporarily restores the ability of doctors in Idaho to provide emergency abortions required under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), by dismissing Idaho’s appeal without resolving the core issues in the case, SCOTUS will only continue to put pregnant patients at unnecessary risk.
Idaho and Moyle et al v. United States is a case brought by extremist politicians seeking to disregard a federal statute — the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), that guarantees people receive treatment for emergency medical conditions. Anti-abortion extremists challenged the law’s application to abortion in an attempt to exclude pregnant people from EMTALA’s longstanding protections.
Leah Rutman, Health Policy Program Director for the ACLU of Washington, had the following statement:
“We know that the fight is far from over. EMTALA saves lives. It is a longstanding federal law that guarantees everyone the right to emergency medical care and, in many cases, abortion is the only care that will save a pregnant patient’s health and life. By not deciding the case on its merits, the Court has failed to protect pregnant patients.
Even if the Supreme Court’s decision provides a temporary reprieve, the chaos and confusion caused by abortion bans across the country will still prevent providers from providing appropriate medical care to their patients when they need it most.
Those who have attacked EMTALA are more concerned with imposing their personal beliefs as opposed to caring for the actual lives and health of pregnant people. This is part of a broader goal of banning abortion nationwide — even in states like ours where it is legal, and where we have passed laws that ensure it is provided as emergency care. Today’s decision is a reminder that we must continue to fight to protect and expand abortion access, in Washington and beyond.”
