Federal Emtala law has become focal point in heated debate over emergency abortions in states that ban procedure
For the second time in a month, the US supreme court on Wednesday will hear arguments in a major abortion-rights case, the second to reach the justices since a 6-3 conservative majority overturned Roe v Wade two years ago.
Wednesday’s case involves a 1986 federal law called the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, or Emtala, which requires hospitals that receive federal dollars to stabilize patients who show up at their emergency rooms with medical emergencies.
Originally devised to stop hospitals from turning away uninsured patients, the law has become a focal point in the national debate over emergency abortions in states that ban the procedure. Doctors and abortion rights advocates say the law is one of the few tools they have left that allow them to help patients whose pregnancies threaten their health.
I would hope for that, but also would not be surprised to see the opposite, that the conservative justices will rule that EMTALA is invalid for some reason and hospitals can refuse uninsured patients or patients whose insurance won’t cover their care.
It would be barbaric, and we’d see hospitals run by VC firms kick out/turn away patients immediately, while county/city/university/religious hospitals will face increasing challenges to provide care for all.