Trump cancels EMTALA advice protecting women needing emergency abortions | Trump administration

The Trump administration on Tuesday canceled the directives of the Biden era on Tuesday, adding that hospitals for abortion states cannot divert pregnant patients who are in medical emergency – a decision that occurs in the midst of several judicial battles in the red state on directives.

Directives deal with the Federal Emergency Medical and Work Treatment (EMTALA), which forces hospitals to stabilize patients confronted with medical emergencies. States such as Idaho and Texas have argued that the directives of the Biden administration, which it published following the reversal of 2022 of Roe V Wade, interpreted Emtala incorrectly.

In his letter canceling the directives, the Trump administration said that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) “will continue to apply Emtala, who protects all the people who have an emergency service at the hospital who requests an examination or treatment, including for identified emergency medical conditions that place the health of a pregnant woman or her child to be born in serious judicial confusion.

Supporters of abortion rights said on Tuesday that the cancellation of Biden administration guidelines would be the capacity of muddy hospitals to interpret EMTALA and endanger the lives of pregnant patients. Since the collapse of ROE, dozens of women have come forward to say that they have been refused medical treatments due to abortion prohibitions. The five pregnant women died after being denied or delayed, or could not access legal abortions.

“This action sends a clear message: the life and health of the speakers are not worth protected,” said Dr. Jamila Perrit, an Ob-Gyn and the President of Physicians for Reproductive Health, in a press release. “Respect for this law can make the difference between life and death for pregnant people, forcing suppliers like me to choose between taking care of someone in their need and turning their backs to comply with cruel and dangerous laws.”

Last year, the United States Supreme Court heard arguments in a case involving the ban on the abortion of Idaho, which only allowed abortions in cases where a woman’s life was in danger. On the other hand, most of the abortion bans allow abortions when the “health” of a patient is in danger – a lower level which could allow doctors to intervene more easily. The Idaho standard, said the Biden administration, prevented doctors from providing abortions in certain emergencies and has violated EMTALA’s requirements that hospitals must stabilize patients.

In the end, the Supreme Court weighed the question by ruling 6-3 for procedural reasons according to which the case had been “improved”, indicating that it should never have taken it in the first place.

“This court was fortunate to bring clarity and certainty to this tragic situation and we waxed it,” wrote Ketanji Brown Jackson, judge of the Supreme Court at the time. “And as long as we refuse to declare what the law requires, pregnant patients of Idaho, Texas and elsewhere will pay the price.”

Tuesday’s Tuesday’s move is not unexpected. In March, the administration decided to abandon the case on the ban on the abortion of Idaho. A local Idaho hospital subsequently filed its own trial for the ban.