Comment More than 80 Democratic lawmakers plan to send a letter on Tuesday calling on President Biden to declare a national and public health emergency in response to his ouster Roe v. Wade as Biden faces mounting pressure to respond more aggressively to the Supreme Court ruling. “As we experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic, a public health emergency declaration can provide significant new authority and flexibility for a federal emergency response,” the lawmakers, led by Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Tex. ) and Rep. Lizzie Fletcher (D-Tex.), wrote in his letter to Biden and Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra. “Health experts warn that in the wake of this devastating decision, the U.S. maternal mortality rate — already the highest in the developed world — is certain to rise, with a disproportionate impact on communities of color.” Several Democratic lawmakers, including Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), have called on Biden in recent days to declare a public health emergency to signal the seriousness with which the administration views the rollback of abortion rights and the impact that will have on women across the country. The letter from 81 Democratic lawmakers further adds to the pressure Biden is facing from his own party to deliver a more comprehensive response to conservative upheavals and channel the anger and fear felt by millions of women. Doctors and abortion rights advocates have warned that bans on the procedure and the abortion pill will create a health crisis for millions, including those seeking abortion care. Biden signed an executive order last week to ensure access to abortion drugs and emergency contraception. “Banning abortion may unnecessarily prevent life-saving medical procedures in the event of pregnancy complications or loss. Health experts warn that in the wake of this devastating decision, the U.S. maternal mortality rate — already the highest in the developed world — is certain to rise, with a disproportionate impact on communities of color,” the lawmakers wrote. Biden said Sunday that he is considering declaring abortion access a public health emergency. “This is something that I’ve asked the … administration doctors to look at, whether … I have the authority to do that and what impact that would have,” Biden said when asked about the statement. But some in his administration have expressed reservations about such a step, arguing that it would not free up significant new funds or authorities or have a significant impact on abortion access for women living in states that have restricted or banned the procedure. Other officials, including HHS, supported the step because it would signal the White House is taking the issue seriously and could help the president politically. Some legal experts question whether a national and public health emergency declaration would make a significant difference in what the administration could do. They also note that a state of emergency must end at some point and that, without legislation from Congress, there is no end. The declarations could unlock new funds, but how those funds will be distributed or used remains unclear. But such a step is almost certain to be legally challenged by Republican attorneys general and could end up facing the same Supreme Court justices who voted to strike Roe v. Wadesaid Lawrence Gostin, professor of medicine at Georgetown University and faculty director of the Institute for National and Global Health Law. “I think so [advocates] overestimate the kinds of funding and power it would unleash, and that there would be enormous negative consequences to doing that,” Gostin said. “It calls on the courts to really limit the use of emergency powers even in a true emergency. … The legal side is fraught with risks for management.” A national emergency declaration, under the Stafford Act, is typically used in response to natural disasters, such as floods or hurricanes, and is administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Both the Trump and Biden administrations have also used it for the coronavirus pandemic, but the statement has not been used for a long-standing health care challenge like abortion. Legal experts questioned its effectiveness in addressing abortion access. A public health emergency declaration issued by the secretary of Health and Human Services could provide new funding, but its policy impact is unclear. HHS issued updated guidance on Monday, making it clear that federal law overrides state abortion bans and protects clinicians’ discretion in providing treatment, including terminating a pregnancy, if doing so is necessary to stabilize the patient in an emergency. necessity. Lawmakers applauded Biden’s executive order, but said the administration’s work is far from over. “The president’s executive order was a good place to start, but not a good place to stop,” Fletcher said. “To respond effectively, we must use every tool available to protect patients and healthcare providers, and declaring a public health emergency provides valuable tools.”
