Hickenlooper, Bennet, Colleagues Send Amicus Brief Urging Federal Court to Protect Access to Emergency Abortions

Members urge the Ninth Circuit to affirm emergency stabilizing treatment to patients, including abortion care when necessary

Ninth Circuit Court received the case after the Supreme Court dismissed it in June

WASHINGTON - Today, U.S. Senators John Hickenlooper and Michael Bennet, along with 258 other members of congress, submitted an amicus brief to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit calling on the court to allow Medicare-funded hospitals to provide life-saving care that may include abortion care. The court is considering Moyle v. United States and Idaho v. United States which concern the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), a federal law that requires hospitals that receive Medicare funding to provide necessary "stabilizing treatment" to patients experiencing medical emergencies, which can include abortion care.

"[T]he 99th Congress passed EMTALA to ensure that every person who visits a Medicare-funded hospital with an 'emergency medical condition' is offered stabilizing treatment," wrote the lawmakers.

"Congress chose broad language for that mandate, requiring hospitals that participate in the Medicare program to provide 'such treatment as may be required to stabilize the medical condition.'… That text-untouched by Congress for the past three decades-makes clear that in situations in which a doctor determines that abortion constitutes the '[n]ecessary stabilizing treatment' for a pregnant patient, federal law requires the hospital to offer it."

After the Dobbs decision in 2022, Idaho passed a law making it a felony for a doctor to terminate a patient's pregnancy unless it is "necessary" to prevent the patient's death. The Department of Justice sued the State of Idaho, arguing that the state's law is preempted by EMTALA in those circumstances in which abortion may not be necessary to prevent imminent death, but still constitutes the necessary stabilizing treatment for a patient's emergency medical condition. The district court agreed; however, Idaho Republicans appealed that ruling to the Supreme Court. In March, Hickenlooper and 257 of his colleagues filed an amicus brief asking the Supreme Court to affirm the district court decision. In June, the Supreme Court sent the case back to the Ninth Circuit Court and reinstated the district court's injunction.

In their brief, the lawmakers ask the Ninth Circuit to uphold the district court's ruling. They argue that the congressional intent, text, and history of EMTALA make clear that covered hospitals must provide abortion care when it's needed to stabilize a patient's emergency medical condition, and that EMTALA preempts Idaho's abortion ban in emergency situations that present a serious threat to a patient's health.

The full amicus brief is available HERE.

###