The Department of Health and Human Services in the United States has stated that a hospital in Oklahoma did not break any federal laws when physicians advised a woman with a nonviable pregnancy to remain in the parking lot until her condition became severe enough to meet the criteria for an abortion, as per the state’s stringent ban.

Last year, Jaci Statton, 26, was one of many women who fought against abortion limitations implemented in states with Republican leadership. This came after the Supreme Court’s decision to revoke the nationwide right to abortion in 2022.

Instead of participating in a legal case, Statton chose to submit a grievance to the Department of Health and Human Services regarding the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA). This occurred about one year after the Biden administration notified hospitals that they are required to offer abortion services in cases where the mother’s life is in danger. The administration argued that EMTALA takes precedence over state laws restricting abortion without appropriate exceptions for medical emergencies.

The recent decision by the Biden administration to reject Statton’s assertion is a continuation of the ongoing examination of how to implement EMTALA in light of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. This further highlights the difficult legal struggle faced by advocates of reproductive rights when challenging state laws restricting abortion.

In early 2023, Statton received news that she was pregnant and soon after, started to suffer from intense discomfort and nausea. After consulting with medical professionals in Oklahoma, she was informed that she had a partial molar pregnancy. If left untreated, this condition could lead to excessive bleeding, infection, and potentially fatal outcomes.

The complaint stated that providers informed Jaci that they could not perform an abortion unless she was experiencing a life-threatening emergency. In the meantime, they suggested she wait in the parking lot to be near the hospital in case her condition worsened.

Oklahoma has strict laws against abortion, with few exceptions. However, the Supreme Court of the state recently reaffirmed that the state’s constitution protects a woman’s right to have an abortion if her life is at risk.

In the end, Statton and her spouse decided to travel to another state for an urgent abortion instead of risking her health by waiting for it to worsen.

In October, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, a division of the Department of Health and Human Services, notified Statton that their investigation was unable to substantiate any violation of the federal law regarding emergency care.

The letter expressed gratitude for bringing this issue to our notice.

The organization that represents Statton, the Center for Reproductive Rights, stated on Friday that her complaint had been rejected. However, they did not provide a reason for waiting several months to announce the denial. In December, a lawyer for the center informed The Associated Press that they had no new information that could be shared publicly.

Rabia Muqaddam, a senior staff attorney at the center, stated that EMTALA is designed to safeguard the right of all individuals to receive necessary treatment for an emergency medical condition, regardless of their state of residence or the type of care required. It is alarming that patients like Jaci are being denied care under these circumstances.

A representative from the Department of Health and Human Services did not promptly reply to an email inquiry for a statement.

The Center for Reproductive Rights is currently involved in legal proceedings in Idaho, Tennessee, and Texas. However, these lawsuits do not aim to overturn the abortion bans in these states. Rather, they seek clarification from state courts regarding the criteria that allow patients to obtain an abortion within the bounds of the law.

Earlier this month, the Supreme Court granted permission for Idaho to implement its stringent abortion ban, even in cases of medical emergencies. This decision was made while a separate legal battle is ongoing. The justices have scheduled arguments for April and have temporarily suspended a lower court’s ruling that prevented the enforcement of the Idaho law in emergency situations at hospitals. This was in response to a federal lawsuit filed by the Biden administration.

In addition, a panel of three judges in New Orleans decided that the government is not allowed to utilize EMTALA to mandate Texas hospitals to perform abortions for women whose pregnancies pose a threat to their lives.