On Jan. 2, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit issued a ruling stating that Texas hospitals and physicians are not obligated to perform emergency abortions under a decades-old federal law requiring hospitals to provide all patients appropriate emergency care.
The appeals court ruled that the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, or EMTALA, "does not mandate any specific type of medical treatment, let alone abortion," and that the law "does not govern the practice of medicine," The Washington Post reported.
In Idaho, a similar case is being reviewed by another appeals court, with a decision expected later in January. The Justice Department will decide whether to appeal either or both of the rulings to the Supreme Court.
After the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June 2022, providers across the nation were left to navigate a patchwork of state restrictions on abortion. HHS aimed to add clarity to the nation's shifting abortion landscape a month later when it issued guidance to hospitals underscoring that abortion is covered under EMTALA, and that it preempts state law where abortion is prohibited and does not make exceptions for the life of a pregnant person.
The state of Texas sued the Biden administration soon after HHS sent the guidance, taking issue with its interpretation of the federal law, and a federal judge sided with the state, blocking guidance from taking effect there.
Most abortion bans include some kind of exceptions for emergencies, though language in many cases is vague, leaving providers uncertain of the circumstances in which they should perform the procedure. Lawyers and hospital administrators have said the Biden administration's focus on EMTALA has done little to clarify guidance for healthcare providers, who feel stuck between the repercussions they face if they violate their state laws and complying with federal law.