With the Dobbs decision in the Supreme Court, the regulation of abortion, that is, the killing of children, was returned to the individual states. So, some states may permit such killing while others have chosen to limit such practice.
This did not sit well with the globalists in the Biden administration who want to reduce the world’s population. These people are constantly looking for some out that would permit the wholesale genocide of unborn children in this country.
Their latest attempt in this area is to exploit a law, called the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act or EMTALA. This law was passed in 1986 to combat patient dumping where hospitals refused to treat indigent patients and unnecessarily transferred such patients out of their hospitals.
Thomas Jipping notes:
EMTALA covers emergency rooms in hospitals that participate in the Medicaid program. It requires the screening of patients, regardless of their ability to pay, to determine whether a patient has an “emergency medical condition.” If she does, she must be offered either “stabilizing treatment” or transfer to another medical facility.
Two weeks after the Supreme Court’s Dobbs ruling, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, issued “guidance” about enforcing the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act in pro-life states.
If a physician believes that “abortion is the stabilizing treatment necessary to resolve” an emergency medical condition, the agency said, “the physician must provide that treatment.” In that situation, a state pro-life law “is preempted.”
In other words, according to federal guidance, EMTALA mandates whatever a physician decides is necessary to stabilize whatever medical condition he observes, regardless of what state law may say.
Texas and two pro-life organizations filed suit against this “guidance.” The U.S. District Court, and now the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, agreed with Texas and these two oragnizations. The 5th Circuit’s unanimous opinion Tuesday in Texas v. Becerra was written by Judge Kurt Engelhardt, a Trump appointee.
Key aspects of the ruling:
First, the law “does not mandate any specific type of medical treatment, let alone abortion.”
Second, the law does not clearly supersede the states’ historic power to regulate both the medical profession and abortion. In fact, a provision specifies that it preempts state or local law only when those measures “directly” conflict.
“In sum,” Engelhardt wrote, “EMTALA does not govern the practice of medicine. … While EMTALA directs physicians to stabilize patients once an emergency medical condition has been diagnosed … the practice of medicine is to be governed by the states.”
Third, under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, emergency medical conditions include those that place “the health of the woman or her unborn child … in serious jeopardy.” The 5thCircuit said that this approach “imposes equal stabilization obligations.”
EMALA’s text, the court concluded, “speaks for itself” and “requires hospitals to stabilize both the pregnant woman and her unborn child.” It does not establish an “unqualified right for the pregnant mother to abort her child.”
So, once again the dictator in Washington who has yet to work with Congress to pass any substantive legislation is stymied in his attempt to end democracy in America. And the children of this country are the benefactors of this court ruling.