{"id":311041,"date":"2024-04-24T16:38:42","date_gmt":"2024-04-24T21:38:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=311041"},"modified":"2024-04-25T09:18:40","modified_gmt":"2024-04-25T14:18:40","slug":"planned-parenthood-lies-er-care-abortion-instagram","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/planned-parenthood-lies-er-care-abortion-instagram\/","title":{"rendered":"Planned Parenthood disseminates lies about ER care and abortion on Instagram"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

On Tuesday, Planned Parenthood shared<\/a> a post on Instagram further spreading misinformation on abortion as “life-saving ER care.” The post, shared in partnership with Impact, “the digital destination for young people shaping the future,” falsely claimed that a case currently at the Supreme Court could end up ‘forcing’ emergency rooms to “deny pregnant people life-saving ER care.”<\/p>\n

The case<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Wednesday in Moyle v. United States<\/i><\/a> and Idaho v. United States<\/a>.\u00a0<\/em>In 2022, two lawsuits were filed in federal court regarding the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA). In one case, Texas sued the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), arguing that EMTALA does not authorize the federal government to “compel” doctors to commit abortions on pregnant women at the ER. In the other case, the HHS sued the state of Idaho in an attempt to block the enforcement of its pro-life law, claiming that it conflicts with EMTALA. The Texas case and the Idaho case had two different outcomes.<\/p>\n

A federal district court initially ruled that the Idaho law conflicted with EMTALA because it had an “affirmative defense” for abortion in a medical emergency instead of an exception. The court blocked the law based on that, though after the decision, the state legislature replaced the affirmative defense clause with a health exception. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals later reinstated the lower court’s ruling blocking the provisions of Idaho’s law that it said conflicted with EMTALA. Idaho appealed to the Supreme Court, which took up the case and heard opening arguments on April 24. The Supreme Court is allowing Idaho to continue enforcing the law while it hears the case.<\/p>\n

\n
\n

 <\/p>\n

\n
<\/div>\n
\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\n
View this post on Instagram<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\n
\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

 <\/p>\n

A post shared by Impact (@impact)<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n