Comment on this story
Comment
More than 80 Democratic lawmakers plan to send a letter Tuesday urging President Biden to issue a national and public health emergency declaration in response to the annulment of the Roe against Wade as Biden faces increasing pressure to respond more aggressively to the Supreme Court ruling.
“As we experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic, a public health emergency statement can provide significant new authority and flexibility for a federal emergency response,” lawmakers, led by Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Tex .) and Representative Lizzie. Fletcher (D-Tex.) Wrote in the letter to Biden and Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra: “Health experts warn that as a result of this disastrous ruling, the U.S. maternal mortality rate, which it is already the highest in the developed world: it will surely increase, with disproportionate impacts on communities of color. “
Several Democratic lawmakers, including Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Have called on Biden in recent days to declare a public health emergency to signal the seriousness with which the administration sees the annulment of the right to abortion and the impact it will have on women across the country. The letter from 81 Democratic lawmakers adds even more to the pressure Biden has faced from his party to give a fuller response to conservative setbacks and to channel the anger and fear felt by millions of women.
Doctors and abortion rights advocates have warned that banning the procedure and the aborted pill will create a health crisis for millions of people, including people seeking care for miscarriages. Biden signed an executive order last week to safeguard access to medications for abortion and emergency contraception.
“A ban on abortion may unnecessarily impede life-saving medical procedures in the event of complications or pregnancy loss. Health experts warn that after this disastrous ruling, the U.S. maternal mortality rate, which already it is the highest in the developed world, it will increase, with disproportionate impacts on communities of color, ”lawmakers wrote.
Biden said Sunday he was considering whether to consider declaring access to abortion a public health emergency. “This is something I have asked the administration’s medical staff to see if … I have the authority to do so and what impact it would have,” Biden said when asked about the statement.
But some of her administration have expressed reservations about this step, arguing that it would not unblock important new funds or authorities or have a significant impact on access to abortion for women living in states that have restricted or banned the procedure. Other officials, including within the HHS, have supported the move because it would indicate that the White House is taking the issue seriously and could help the president politically.
Some legal experts question whether a national emergency and public health emergency declaration would make a significant difference in what the administration could do. They also point out that an emergency must end at some point and that, without legislation in Congress, there is no end in sight.
Statements could unlock new funds, but it is unclear how those funds would be distributed or used. But it is almost certain that this step would be legally challenged by Republican attorneys general and could end up facing the same Supreme Court judges who voted in favor of the revocation. Roe against Wadesaid Lawrence Gostin, a professor of medicine at Georgetown University and director of the faculty of its National and Global Health Law Institute.
“I think [advocates] exaggerating the types of funding and power it would trigger and that doing so would have huge adverse consequences, “Gostin said.” It calls on the courts to really limit the use of emergency powers even in a genuine emergency. … The legal part is full of dangers for the administration. “
A national emergency declaration, in accordance with the Stafford Act, is typically used in response to natural disasters, such as floods or hurricanes, and is administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Both the Trump and Biden administrations also used it for the coronavirus pandemic, but the statement has not been used for a long-term health challenge such as abortion. Legal experts have questioned its effectiveness in addressing access to abortion.
A public health emergency statement, issued by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, could provide new funding, but its impact on policy is unclear.
The HHS issued an updated guide Monday making it clear that federal law overrides state abortion bans and protects doctors ’judgment when administering treatment, including termination of pregnancy if necessary to stabilize a patient in an emergency situation.
Lawmakers applauded Biden’s executive order, but said the administration’s work was not over yet.
“The president’s executive order was a good place to start, but not a good place to stop,” Fletcher said. “To respond effectively, we must use all available tools to protect patients and health care providers, and declaring a public health emergency provides valuable tools.”