BY: JENNIFER SHUTT
State's Newsroom
WASHINGTON — Senate Democrats attempted to pass a resolution Tuesday addressing abortion access in emergency medical situations, but Republicans blocked it from moving forward.
The floor action followed months of unsuccessful attempts by congressional Democrats to approve legislation on various reproductive rights, including access to birth control and in vitro fertilization.
Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., said Tuesday she introduced the resolution to clarify what Congress’ objective was several decades ago when lawmakers approved the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, or EMTALA.
“We want to make it clear that Congress’s intent is that women can get life-saving care when they go to an emergency room anywhere in this country,” Murray said.
Oklahoma Republican Sen. James Lankford blocked Murray’s unanimous consent request to approve the resolution, saying that doctors in emergency departments are able to act in cases of miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy and life-threatening situations.
“This is a false claim that somehow what happened in the Dobbs decision and what’s happening in states is limiting that,” Lankford said. “It’s actually the political rhetoric that’s making people afraid.”
Lankford objected to another of Murray’s unanimous consent requests in March, blocking approval of legislation that would have expanded access to in vitro fertilization for military members and veterans.
No recorded vote
Unanimous consent is the fastest way to approve legislative items in the Senate. Under the process, any one senator can ask to approve a bill or resolution and any one senator can object. There is no recorded vote that puts all senators on the record.
Murray’s two-page resolution, which had the backing of 40 cosponsors, would have expressed “the sense of the Senate that every person has the basic right to emergency health care, including abortion care.”
The resolution also expressed that “State laws that purport to ban and restrict abortion in emergency circumstances force medical providers to decide between withholding necessary, stabilizing medical care from a patient experiencing a medical emergency or facing criminal prosecution, and put the lives, health, and futures of patients at risk.”
This resolution wouldn’t have actually changed the text of EMTALA.
The 1986 law states that hospital emergency departments must treat or transfer patients who have emergency medical conditions, regardless of their health insurance status or ability to pay.
It defines an emergency medical condition as something that could result in the health of the patient being in “serious jeopardy,” such as the patient “experiencing serious impairment to bodily functions, or serious dysfunction of any bodily organ or part.”
Dobbs decision
The federal law has been the center of political and legal debate since the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the constitutional right to abortion two years ago in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization ruling.
The Biden administration issued a public letter shortly afterward saying EMTALA protected doctors and other qualified health care providers who ended a pregnancy to stabilize the patient if their life or health was at risk.
Republican attorneys general in several states challenged that view of the law and the U.S. Department of Justice later sued Idaho over its abortion law.
That case made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court earlier this year, but the justices ultimately decided to send it back to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The high court said it should have waited to hear the case until after the lower court ruled.
At the center of the disagreement between Republican state attorneys general and the Biden administration is that the federal law applies when a pregnant patient’s life or health is at risk; many of the conservative state laws only allow abortions after a certain gestational age when a woman’s life is at risk.
Exactly when a woman’s life becomes at risk due to pregnancy complications has led to dozens of stories from women throughout the country, who say they had to wait for treatment until their health deteriorated further.
Analysis from the Associated Press released in August found that more than 100 women experiencing medical distress during pregnancy were turned away from hospitals or negligently treated during the last two years.
ProPublica recently obtained reports “that confirm that at least two women have already died after they couldn’t access legal abortions and timely medical care in their state.”
‘This cruelty is unforgivable and unacceptable’
The Senate resolution that Republicans rejected Tuesday is nearly identical to one House Democrats introduced earlier this month.
Murray said ahead of her UC request that women and their families will not forget about being denied medical care due to Republican state restrictions on abortion access.
“No woman is ever going to forget when she was sent off to miscarry alone after her doctor said, ‘Look, I know your life is in danger, but I’m not sure I’m allowed to save you right now,’” Murray said. “No husband is going to forget calling 911 in a panic after finding his wife bloody and unconscious. No child is going to forget, for a single day of their life, the mother that was taken from them by Republican abortion bans.
“This cruelty is unforgivable and unacceptable. Democrats will not let it become settled status quo.”