Federal court allows Texas to ban emergency abortions, defying statute
OAN’s Elizabeth Volberding
5:50 PM – Tuesday, January 2, 2024
Texas has the power to ban emergency abortions, according to a federal appeals court ruling, despite the United States Department of Health and Human Services’ claim that a federal statute overrides state laws prohibiting the procedure.
On Tuesday, a federal appeals court ruled that the Biden administration cannot enforce a 1986 emergency care law that requires Texas hospitals to perform abortions for pregnant women in life-threatening situations.
The 5th United States Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a district court’s decision in favor of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. The appeal was heard by Judge Leslie Southwick, a George W. Bush appointee, and Trump appointees Kurt Engelhardt and Cory Wilson.
The 5th Circuit panel sided with Texas, arguing that the language in the 1986 emergency care law requires hospitals to ”stabilize” both the pregnant woman and her fetus.
“The Texas plaintiffs’ argument that medical treatment is historically subject to the police power of the States, not to be superseded unless that was the clear and manifest purpose of Congress, is convincing,” Engelhardt wrote.
Last month, the Texas Supreme Court denied a request for an emergency court order that would have allowed Kate Cox, a pregnant woman whose fetus had a fatal diagnosis, to have an abortion in the state. As a result, Cox had to leave Texas to undergo the procedure.
In 2022, Paxton filed a lawsuit to block oversight from the Department of Health and Human Services, which stated that doctors should provide abortions in emergency cases in accordance with a federal law passed in 1986.
This forced doctors to provide necessary care to patients in emergency rooms, regardless of their financial situation.
The Biden administration also faced a ruling by United States District Judge James Wesley Hendrix, who prohibited the federal agency from enforcing the oversight in Texas and against two anti-abortion groups of doctors in 2022.
In his decision, Hendrix concluded that the department’s guidelines went “well beyond” the written language of the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act.
In Tuesday’s opinion, Engelhardt stated that the appeals court agreed with the district court’s finding that the federal statute known as EMTALA “does not provide an unqualified right for the pregnant mother to abort her child, especially when EMTALA imposes equal stabilization obligations.”
“We therefore decline to expand the scope of EMTALA,” Engelhardt added.
Stay informed! Receive breaking news updates directly to your inbox for free. Subscribe here.
A new USA Today-Suffolk University poll reveals Biden’s failure to attract young voters as well as Black and Hispanic voters.
America’s newest branch of the armed forces is breaking down traditional military barriers.
The identity of the driver in a fatal car crash in Rochester has been released.
The Red Sea experiences another escalation as tensions in the Middle East continue to rise.
Apple’s shares fell nearly 3% to a seven-week low after Barclays downgraded them due to concerns about weak demand for its devices in 2024.
Bitcoin surged past $45,000 for the first time since April 2022, fueled by optimism about the potential approval of exchange-traded spot bitcoin funds.
December 22, 2023 – 6:05 AM PST HONG KONG (Reuters) – Chinese regulators announced on Friday a wide range of rules aimed…
One of the main challenges for Tesla is the speed at which it can produce the 4680 batteries used in the Cybertruck with its new dry-coating technology.
rnrn
How does this ruling contribute to the ongoing debate over reproductive rights in the United States
The Power of Texas: Federal Appeals Court Rules in Favor of State’s Ability to Ban Emergency Abortions
On January 2, 2024, a federal appeals court delivered a significant ruling regarding Texas’ authority to ban emergency abortions. Despite arguments from the United States Department of Health and Human Services that a federal statute takes precedence over state laws prohibiting the procedure, the court affirmed that Texas has the power to enforce such a ban.
The 5th United States Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the decision made by a district court, which favored Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. The appeal was heard by Judge Leslie Southwick, a George W. Bush appointee, as well as Trump appointees Kurt Engelhardt and Cory Wilson.
The court panel sided with Texas, citing the language used in the 1986 emergency care law, which states that hospitals must “stabilize” both the pregnant woman and her fetus. They agreed with the Texas plaintiffs’ argument that medical treatment historically falls under the jurisdiction of states’ police power, and can only be superseded by Congress with a clear and manifest purpose. Judge Engelhardt expressed support for this position in his written opinion.
This ruling follows a recent decision by the Texas Supreme Court to deny a pregnant woman’s request for an emergency court order that would have allowed her to have an abortion in the state. As a result, the woman had to leave Texas to undergo the procedure elsewhere.
Attorney General Ken Paxton had previously filed a lawsuit aimed at preventing oversight from the Department of Health and Human Services. The department stated that doctors should provide abortions in emergency cases in accordance with the federal law passed in 1986. Paxton’s lawsuit aimed to block this requirement, thus allowing doctors to consider the financial situation of the patient when providing necessary care in emergency rooms.
The Biden administration had also faced a ruling by United States District Judge James Wesley Hendrix, who prohibited the federal agency from enforcing oversight in Texas and against two anti-abortion groups of doctors in 2022. Judge Hendrix concluded that the department’s guidelines went beyond the written language of the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act.
In the recent opinion delivered by Judge Engelhardt, he affirmed the district court’s finding that the federal statute known as EMTALA does not provide an unqualified right for the pregnant mother to abort her child, especially when EMTALA imposes equal stabilization obligations.
This ruling sets a precedent for Texas, establishing its authority to ban emergency abortions. It highlights the ongoing debate over reproductive rights and the balance of power between the federal government and individual states. As the legal landscape surrounding abortion continues to evolve, it remains a divisive and contentious issue that sparks passionate arguments on both sides.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...