SCOTUS hears Oral Arguments in EMTALA Case

Today, the Supreme Court of the United States heard oral arguments in Idaho v. United States and Moyle v. United States, pivotal cases with far-reaching implications for emergency medical care. While the oral arguments were occurring, PRH President & CEO Dr. Jamila Perritt, ob/gyn and abortion provider in DC, and PRH Fellow Dr. Caitlin Gustafson, family medicine physician in Idaho, took to the steps of the Court to share why abortion is necessary stabilizing treatment under EMTALA and life-saving health care.

Following the oral arguments, Dr. Perritt replied with the following statement:

"It is undeniable that pregnant people facing medical emergencies deserve timely and compassionate health care. This holds true whether someone is having a child, needs miscarriage management, or needs an abortion. Today, the Supreme Court Justices heard attempts to belittle and dehumanize the urgent need of pregnant people to receive emergency abortion care. I am appalled at some of the efforts by anti-abortion states to make claims that any religious or moral objection would override the care a patient needs.

"As a physician, I am deeply aware of the fact that medical emergencies during pregnancy are delicate and timely. They require fast response to protect the health and wellbeing of the pregnant person. We know that abortion bans are cruel. They attempt to strip us of our agency and autonomy. Anti-abortion judges and politicians claim to care about our health and well-being but, in reality, they do not believe that pregnant people deserve timely medical attention when faced with an emergency. In short, they do not care if pregnant people live or die if the care required to save their lives is abortion care. Besides being cruel, these laws are intentionally confusing and designed to cause chaos.

We will not sit and wait while patients get sicker and sicker. We will not endanger their health. We will not rob them of their futures.

"My colleagues across the country and I became physicians to keep people safe and healthy. We know that federal protections like EMTALA were designed to ensure people get the life-saving care they need, and abortion is life-saving care. We will not sit and wait while patients get sicker and sicker. We will not endanger their health. We will not rob them of their futures. PRH and our network of physician advocates across the country will keep showing up and doing the work to provide safe, evidence-based care. We urge the Court to issue a timely decision in line with EMTALA's requirements to provide stabilizing care, which can include abortion, in medical emergencies."