Some really important things are happening in the world of women’s health and reproductive rights. In case you weren’t aware or if you’ve heard of EMTALA and the case that is with the Supreme Court coming out of Idaho, I wanted to bring on an expert to explain what is happening and what it could mean for health care providers in the future.
Alexa is a deputy director at the ACLU reproductive freedom project located in New York City. For almost 20 years, Alexa has been litigating in states across the country, including at the US Supreme Court to protect and expand access to abortion and other forms of reproductive health care. A number of those cases have concerned EMTALA, the federal law that guarantees hospitals provide abortions to pregnant patients facing a medical emergency.
Alexa decided when she was 15 that she wanted to be an ACLU lawyer. Since graduating college, she has essentially never worked anywhere else. She started as an assistant paralegal doing racial justice, First Amendment and national security work one week after 911. Then she went to law school and came straight back during college and law school she was always involved in abortion rights advocacy, and when a fellowship opened up at the ACLU reproductive freedom project in 2007. She applied and has been there ever since.
Disclaimer: This podcast does not provide medical advice. The information on this podcast is for informational purposes only. No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
In this episode, we discuss:
The background and history of EMTALA.
How and why it was started.
The recent case in Idaho that went to the Supreme Court.
What the future of reproductive rights would look like for patients and providers if the court sides with Idaho
Resources:
Amicus brief: The ACLU, ACLU of Idaho and law firm Cooley LLP filed an amicus brief with the United States Supreme Court to explain that Idaho’s arguments cannot be justified. https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/aclu-brief-in-emergency-abortion-care-case-highlights-idaho-politicians-deeply-flawed-legal-arguments
TIME: What Blocking Emergency Abortion Care in Idaho Means for Doctors Like Me: An op-ed by Dr. Caitlin Gustafson, a family physician in Mccall, Idaho, and the co-president of the Idaho Coalition for Safe Healthcare. https://time.com/6968774/idaho-abortion-doctors-essay/
ACLU: Supreme Court to Determine Whether Politicians Can Deny Medical Emergency Medical Care to Pregnant People: A press release from the ACLU on the United States Supreme Court hearing oral arguments in Idaho and Moyle, et al. v. United States. https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/supreme-court-to-determine-whether-politicians-can-deny-emergency-medical-care-to-pregnant-people
Questions:
What is the background/history of EMTALA? This act started with protecting pregnant people; how did we get here?
Since the Supreme Court took this case, Idaho has been allowed to prevent doctors from providing emergency abortion care, which has long been protected under EMTALA. Can you talk about the effects this has had on people in Idaho?
What are the possible outcomes of this Supreme Court case? Who would be impacted the most? Will this impact states outside of Idaho?
What threats does this case pose to medical professionals who are trying to provide care — alongside those trying to build their families?
There is also a Supreme Court case before the justices on access to mifepristone — a pill used for medication abortion and miscarriage care. How will this impact reproductive health care, and are there other federal threats looming?
Episode 166: EMTALA, Idaho, and the Future of Reproductive Rights with litigator, Alexa Kolbi-Molinas