TODAY: SCOTUS Hears Oral Arguments on Biden’s EMTALA Attack on Unborn Children

For Immediate Release: April 24, 2024
Contact: [email protected]

Biden Uses Idaho Challenge to Spread Misinformation

Washington, D.C. – Today the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Idaho v. United States, the case on Joe Biden’s HHS memo reinterpreting EMTALA to require ER doctors to perform abortions. The lawsuit challenges Idaho’s Defense of Life Act which protects unborn children from elective abortions and has a life of the mother exception.

The Biden Administration sued Idaho, claiming Idaho’s law violates EMTALA which was enacted in the 1980s in response to ERs refusing to treat patients based on their inability to pay. There is no mention of abortion in EMTALA. The requirement to provide stabilizing care for both a pregnant woman and her “unborn child” is mentioned more than once.

SBA Pro-Life America’s State Public Affairs Director Kelsey Pritchard commented:

“The Biden administration’s attack on Idaho’s Defense of Life law is more of a PR stunt to spread abortion lobby misinformation than it is a valid legal strategy to take down states’ pro-life laws.

“The EMTALA case is based on the false premise that pregnant women cannot receive emergency care under pro-life laws. It is a clear fact that pregnant women can receive miscarriage care, ectopic pregnancy care and treatment in a medical emergency in all 50 states. Every pro-life law allows this. Joe Biden has created confusion on this fact to justify his extremely unpopular agenda for all-trimester abortion. His lie is putting women in danger and may result in delay of care for those experiencing an emergency.”

Dr. Ingrid Skop, M.D., FACOG, a board-certified OB-GYN who serves as vice president and director of medical affairs at Charlotte Lozier Institute, added:

“I have practiced under EMTALA over my 30-year career. The law has never been confusing to me or my obstetric peers, because it calls for the protection of the health of both mothers and their unborn children, which Lozier’s amicus brief outlines clearly. Like approximately 90% of obstetricians, I do not perform abortions, yet I have always been willing and able to intervene if a pregnancy emergency threatened my patient’s life. Every state pro-life law allows a physician to use his or her medical judgment to determine how to protect a mother’s life in an emergency. Any attempt to use federal law to force physicians to perform abortions is not only unnecessary and coercive but distracts them from their oath to do no harm.”

Dr. Skop is a co-author of an in-depth analysis of the life of the mother exceptions in each state. Twenty-four states have pro-life laws protecting life at 12 weeks or sooner. Each law allows women to receive care in the event of a miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy or other emergency.

The Charlotte Lozier Institute earlier this year filed a brief supporting Attorney General Raul Labrador’s defense of Idaho’s law protecting unborn children. In January, the Supreme Court determined Idaho’s law protecting babies through pregnancy would remain in effect throughout the legal process.

Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America is a network of more than one million pro-life Americans nationwide, dedicated to ending abortion by electing national leaders and advocating for laws that save lives, with a special calling to promote pro-life women leaders.

Charlotte Lozier Institute was launched in 2011 as the education and research arm of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America. CLI is a hub for research and public policy analysis on some of the most pressing issues facing the United States and nations around the world. The Institute is named for a feminist physician known for her commitment to the sanctity of human life and equal career and educational opportunities for women.


Share this article: