Calif. sues Catholic hospital for refusing to perform emergency abortion
California has filed a lawsuit against a Catholic hospital that refused to perform an abortion on a woman who reportedly was experiencing a life-threatening medical emergency.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta said in a press release Monday that his office has filed a complaint against Providence St. Joseph Hospital of Eureka in Humboldt County Superior Court.
The lawsuit alleges that, in February, the hospital refused to perform an abortion on Anna Nusslock, whose water broke when she was 15 weeks pregnant with twins.
Get Our Latest News for FREE
Nusslock had to go to a critical access hospital 12 miles away from Providence, according to the complaint, with her “actively hemorrhaging by the time she was on the operating table.”
The attorney general hopes to receive an injunction against the Catholic hospital that would require its medical staff to perform emergency abortions for patients in the future, in keeping with state abortion law.
“It is damning that here in California, where abortion care is a constitutional right, we have a hospital implementing a policy that’s reminiscent of heartbeat laws in extremist red states,” said Bonta, as quoted in the announcement.
“With today’s lawsuit, I want to make this clear for all Californians: abortion care is healthcare. You have the right to access timely and safe abortion services. At the California Department of Justice, we will use the full force of this office to hold accountable those who, like Providence, are breaking the law.”
An unnamed Providence spokesperson told Reuters via email that the medical facility was “heartbroken over Dr. Nusslock's experience earlier this year."
“Providence is deeply committed to the health and wellness of women and pregnant patients and provides emergency services to all who walk through our doors in accordance with state and federal law,” stated the hospital spokesperson.
Providence is believed to be the first hospital to be sued under California’s Emergency Services Law requiring hospitals to provide any care “necessary to relieve or eliminate the emergency medical condition,” The New York Times reported.
The Emergency Services Law does not have a religious exemption, reported the Times, with the state arguing that the issues at hand exceed protections for religious exercise.
The state law was modeled after the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, passed in 1986, and meant to guarantee that hospitals provide a wide range of emergency medical care, regardless of whether a patient can pay.
Currently, the Biden administration and Idaho, which has a near-total ban on abortions, are in ongoing litigation over whether EMTALA requires hospitals in the state to provide emergency abortions.
In late June, the United States Supreme Court vacated a stay on a lower court injunction allowing the federal government to require hospitals that receive Medicare funds to provide abortions for emergency reasons and sent the case down to the lower court level for further proceedings.
