The Supreme Court's FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine is not just about standing. It's about religion. As I predicted following argument, the Court has issued a new, expansive, and incorrect interpretation of federal conscience laws.
Not much to read - pp.15-17 - but red flags all around - including the idea that doctors are free to deny ANY care (ie, blood transfusions following abortion). The government made this claim at oral argument as a strategic matter - and I found it alarming and probably wrongheaded
on re-read i think you're right to be concerned.
but am optimistic that, push come to shove, docs will do the right thing, not least because i would not want to be the first doc to test the sincerity of this theory of EMTALA, either from a moral perspective or from a liability perspective.
