Two teams of Foley Hoag LLP attorneys, from the Healthcare Department and International Litigation & Arbitration Department, respectively, filed friend-of-the-court briefs on behalf of different organizations before the U.S. Supreme Court in Idaho v. United States

Oral hearings will take place on April 24, 2024, to determine whether a critical nationwide guarantee of access to emergency hospital care protects pregnant persons who require an abortion as stabilizing care to prevent death or severe and long-lasting injury to health

Foley Hoag's Healthcare Group filed a brief on behalf of leading public health and health care organizations—the American Public Health Association, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the American Medical Women's Association and the Network for Public Health Law—as well as 133 deans and scholars in public health, health professions, and health law and policy to protect the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) ("Public Health Amicus")

Foley Hoag's International Litigation & Arbitration Department filed a separate brief on behalf of Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the Global Justice Center, and the IPAS Impact Network on the obligations of the United States under international law in accordance with the treaties it has ratified ("International Law Amicus")

Since 1986, EMTALA has applied to all Medicare-participating hospitals with emergency departments. In the aftermath of the Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization, which overturned Roe v. Wade and ended the constitutional right to abortion, but did not alter EMTALA's special emergency care protections, the question of whether Dobbs affects this unique law has loomed

The Public Health Amicus brief argues that if the Supreme Court allows Idaho to proceed despite the clear scope and sweep of EMTALA, states could bar their hospitals from intervening in other health emergencies including any type of emergency involving pregnant persons where pregnancy loss might be a consequence of emergency intervention. The brief also argues that EMTALA preempts state laws that conflict with the emergency care obligations it imposes on the nearly 6000 U.S. hospitals that participate in Medicare. Idaho's state law criminalizes the provision of abortion care in all but life-endangering situations, putting the law at direct odds with EMTALA's universal protections

These amici are represented by Foley Hoag attorneys Thomas Barker (counsel of record), Andrew London, Jack C. Smith, and Alexander Somodevilla,with assistance from paralegalAnnmarie Silvasy

The International Law Amicus brief outlines the international law implications for the United States in connection with Idaho's narrow exception for its near-total abortion ban. This brief argues that the ambiguities arising from what constitutes an "emergency medical condition" in the Idaho law have resulted in physicians refusing to treat persons facing complications associated with pregnancy and triggered an exodus of OBGYNs from restrictive states like Idaho out of fear of prosecution, in violation of the United States's treaty obligations, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD), and the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT)

Amici are represented by Foley Hoag attorneys Christina Hioureas (counsel of record), Kian Azimpoor, Patrick Brennan, and Iulia Padeanu Mellon, with assistance from paralegal Katie Weiner