Basic US Civics Lesson: Remember the Supremacy Clause? Federal laws supercede state laws. State laws can be stronger than federal laws but they cannot weaken federal statutes. According to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, that did not apply in their latest ruling upholding a district court’s ruling that said Texas can ban emergency abortions even though the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services says a federal statute takes priority over state laws prohibiting the procedure.
The Biden administration issued guidance in 2022 stating that the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA), a federal law governing emergency rooms, can require an abortion when necessary to stabilize a patient with a medical emergency, even in states where it is banned. The guidance came soon after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned its landmark Roe v. Wade ruling, which since 1973 had guaranteed a right to abortion nationwide.
Immediately following the issuance, Texas’ corrupt and criminal Attorney General Ken Paxton and two anti-abortion medical associations – the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists and the Christian Medical & Dental Associations challenged the guidance claiming it interfered with the state’s right to restrict abortion. A lower court judge in August 2022 agreed, finding that EMTALA was silent as to what a doctor should do when there is a conflict between the health of the mother and the unborn child and that the Texas abortion ban “fills that void” by including narrow exceptions to save the mother’s life or prevent serious bodily injury in some cases.
The appeal was heard by Judge Leslie Southwick, an appointee of President George W. Bush, and Trump appointees Kurt Engelhardt and Cory Wilson.
“The Texas plaintiffs argument that medical treatment is historically subject to police power of the States, not to be superseded unless that was the clear and manifest purpose of Congress, is convincing,” Engelhardt wrote.
n his ruling, Hendrix found that the department’s guidance went “well beyond” the text of the law known as the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act.
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,” Engelhardt wrote in Tuesday’s opinion.
“We therefore decline to expand the scope of EMTALA,” he added.
