Abortion battles shift to medical emergencies, travel
Send a link to a friend
[December 27, 2023]
By Brendan Pierson
(Reuters) - The legal landscape surrounding abortion has been roiled by
uncertainty since the U.S. Supreme Court last year overturned its
landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling, which had guaranteed abortion rights
nationwide.
Abortion providers and reproductive rights groups have brought a slew of
lawsuits seeking to invalidate new bans and abortion restrictions that
went into effect in many Republican-led states after Roe fell, invoking
women's rights under state constitutions. The cases often resulted in
preliminary victories followed by whiplash reversals on appeal, leaving
providers and patients in limbo.
Many of those frontal challenges have now been decided by state supreme
courts, which have upheld abortion bans in South Carolina, Indiana,
Georgia and elsewhere.
Of course, the initial wave of litigation is not over. Some of the state
challenges - like Florida's - are still awaiting rulings. In another
notable case with nationwide implications filed by conservative
activists in 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court is considering whether to roll
back access to the abortion pill mifepristone.
Nonetheless, there has been a shift in the litigation, away from the
broad, head-on challenges and toward narrower issues arising from the
bans. A newer wave of lawsuits has focused on when emergency medical
exceptions to abortion bans apply and whether states can stop their
citizens from traveling to states where abortion remains legal- a trend
experts expect to continue in the new year.
WHY IT MATTERS
All of the 18 states that have banned or sharply restricted abortion
allow exceptions for medical emergencies when continued pregnancy would
endanger the mother's life, or, in some states, health. But in practice,
according to allegations in multiple lawsuits and public testimony from
women, those exceptions are often unavailable because the laws are so
vague that physicians are not sure when they apply, and so are unwilling
to perform abortions for fear of prosecution.
The issue received widespread national attention in December when the
Texas Supreme Court ruled against Kate Cox, a Dallas Fort-Worth area
woman who had sought an emergency medical abortion of her nonviable
pregnancy. While that decision only applied to Cox, the state court is
still considering another case about the scope of the medical exception
that will apply more broadly.
"Its becoming increasingly clear to the American public that there are a
lot of scenarios in pregnancy where people need access to abortion" but
can't get one, said Elizabeth Sepper, a professor of health law at the
University of Texas at Austin.
Data suggests that many women seeking abortion in states where it is
banned, for medical or other reasons, travel out of state, like Cox did
while she was awaiting the Texas Supreme Court's ruling. According to
the Guttmacher Institute, a research group that supports abortion
rights, about 92,100 women crossed state lines for an abortion in the
first half of 2023 - more than double the number in a six-month period
in 2020.
[to top of second column]
|
Abortion rights activists and counter protesters protest outside the
U.S. Supreme Court on the first anniversary of the court ruling in
the Dobbs v Women's Health Organization case, overturning the
landmark Roe v Wade abortion decision, in Washington, U.S., June 24,
2023. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz/File Photo
Some states, like Alabama, Texas,
Oklahoma and Idaho, have sought to stop that by making it a crime to
help, or pay for, such travel. Lawsuits over such measures are
pending in Alabama and Idaho.
WHAT IT MEANS FOR 2024
Sepper and others said they expect more litigation over travel and,
especially, medical exceptions in the coming year.
Greer Donley, a professor at Pittsburgh Law School who focuses on
abortion, said most such cases will not be brought by plaintiffs
like Cox in need of an immediate abortion, since many people in that
position would not want to take on the burden of a lawsuit and being
in the national spotlight.
"I think it's important to remember that what Kate Cox was willing
to do was so extraordinary," Donley said.
However, lawsuits over health exceptions could still be brought by
physicians or women who have reason to believe they will face
complicated pregnancies.
One such case, brought by Planned Parenthood and others, is already
pending in an Indiana state court. The case seeks to capitalize on a
ruling by the Indiana Supreme Court that, while upholding the
state's abortion ban, found that the state constitution allows
abortion to preserve the mother's life or health.
Two other pending cases center on a federal law, the Emergency
Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA), requiring emergency
rooms to stabilize patients with an emergency condition. The Biden
administration said last year that, if EMTALA conflicts with a state
abortion ban, the federal law takes precedence.
The guidance prompted challenges from state governments in Texas,
where the federal government is currently blocked from enforcing it,
and Idaho, where a judge has sided with the administration. Both
cases are being appealed.
David Cohen, a professor at Drexel University Law School, said that
while the issue of medical exceptions affects a relatively small
share of people seeking abortions, they have provided an effective
message for abortion rights advocates about harms caused by bans.
That will be particularly important in the coming year's elections,
where Democrats expect abortion to be a potent issue.
"Those stories seem to be resonating," Cohen said.
(Reporting By Brendan Pierson in New York; Editing by Alexia
Garamfalvi and Jonathan Oatis)
[© 2023 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]This material
may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |