House Democrats introduce resolution supporting emergency abortion care

House Democrats on Thursday introduced a resolution to make it clear that a federal emergency care law must allow physicians to perform emergency abortions.

The resolution comes after the Supreme Court in June dismissed a case regarding Idaho’s abortion ban without settling the underlying question on whether federal law allows physicians to perform abortions in medical emergencies.

The court ruled to dismiss the case as improvidently granted, which means doctors in Idaho will be able to perform emergency abortions despite state-level restrictions while the case is being litigated.

The appeals court is scheduled to hear oral arguments in the case in early December.

But the justices did not resolve the underlying questions raised by the case, and because states have been reluctant to provide substantial guidance to doctors about what constitutes a medical emergency, abortion care remains a legal gray area in dozens of states.

The resolution, led by Reps. Emilia Sykes (D-Ohio) and Mikie Sherrill (D-N.J.), would express “the sense of the House of Representatives” that abortion is a form of stabilizing care under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA).

“The Supreme Court’s ruling only increased chaos and uncertainty, leaving more women in danger and the door wide open for future attacks on reproductive health care,” Sykes said during a news conference Thursday.

“So let me be clear, women should be able to access the reproductive health care when they need it, whenever they need it, but especially if they are in a life-or-death situation,” she added.

EMTALA requires federally funded hospitals to provide stabilizing care to emergency room patients no matter their ability to pay. Abortion is the standard of care to stabilize many pregnancy-related conditions, and hospitals have long provided the procedure when necessary.

The Biden administration invoked EMTALA in the wake of the Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe v. Wade. The administration said state laws or mandates that employ a more restrictive definition of an emergency medical condition are preempted by the federal statute.

But EMTALA doesn’t specifically mention abortion and doesn’t outline which procedures should be provided. Idaho argued state law supersedes the federal requirement, and states can create a carve-out for abortion if the patient’s life is not at risk.

“Women in America should not be on their deathbed to receive an abortion,” Sherrill said. “Lives are at risk, and despite clear federal law and additional guidance from the Biden administration, states across the country are refusing to treat pregnant women in emergencies.”

House resolutions are nonbinding and don’t require the approval of the Senate or the signature of the president. But it faces long odds in the GOP-controlled chamber.

For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to The Hill.