Chief Healthcare Executive April 25, 2024
Ron Southwick

The justices heard arguments Wednesday stemming from a law in Idaho. Healthcare groups fear the court could restrict emergency care in cases going beyond abortion rights.

The Supreme Court weighed arguments on the ability of doctors to perform an abortion in medical emergencies, but healthcare groups say the case has even broader implications.

Justices listened to arguments on whether federal law, which requires hospitals to stabilize patients in emergencies, supersedes state laws restricting abortion. The case stems from a law in Idaho that prohibits abortion in all cases except to protect the life of the patients, or in cases of rape or incest.

The Biden administration has consistently argued that the federal law requires hospitals to treat those patients, even...

Today's Sponsors

LEK
ZeOmega

Today's Sponsor

LEK

Continue Reading

 
Topics: Congress / White House, Govt Agencies, Health System / Hospital, Patient / Consumer, Provider
Related Articles:
Ellison Institute of Technology campus in Oxford to focus on HealthTech as one of 4 key areas of technological innovation
Opinion: Readers respond to funding academic medical centers, the ‘residency research arms race,’ and more
Hospitals could see more financial pressure from ban of non-compete agreements, Fitch Ratings says
Cybersecurity and hospitals: Big risks come from third parties
Hospitals face financial hurdles as costs rise, reimbursements lag

Share This Article