America’s Catholic bishops are pushing back against the Biden administration’s plans to fund abortions for American Indians. Last month, the Indian Health Service (IHS, a division of the Department of Health and Human Services, nothing to do with the Jesuits) moved to rescind “outdated regulations” regarding federal funding of abortions for American Indians. At present, the IHS is only able to use government funding for abortions where a physician certifies “‘the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term.”
American Indians have previously expressed that they do not want the federal government to set up abortion facilities on tribal lands.
Referring to the Hyde Amendment — which prohibits the use of federal taxpayer dollars to fund abortions except in cases of rape or incest or where the mother’s life would be endangered by carrying her unborn baby to term — the IHS wrote, “These regulations are no longer necessary…” The federal agency specifically noted the changes that the Hyde Amendment has undergone since it took effect in 1980, but stated that it would not be adjusting its policy to reflect the current stipulations of the Hyde Amendment. The proposed changes would also rescind the requirement that a physician certify a pregnancy threatens the life of the mother. (READ MORE from S.A. McCarthy: German Bishops’ Schism Averted — For Now)
Last week, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) wrote to Joshuah Marshall, the senior advisor to the director of the HIS and the man who proposed the rule changes, urging him not to allow federal funding of abortions for American Indians. The USCCB’s lawyers wrote that “there is no reason to rescind the certification requirement … nor does IHS provide any reason for rescinding it.” They added, “The certification requirement is important because it ensures compliance with the funding limitations prescribed by Congress.”
The USCCB warned that rescinding the current regulations does not necessarily bring the IHS’s abortion policy into alignment with federal abortion law and instead suggested revisions to the rules, instead of just the removal of rules. For example, rescinding the present rules would eliminate the IHS’s definition of a “physician” who must certify that a mother’s life is threatened by a pregnancy.
Referring to Marshall’s argument that current IHS policy does not allow for federal funding of abortions in the case of rape or incest, the USCCB further noted that the Clinton administration enacted requirements for reporting rape or incest as a prerequisite for obtaining an abortion. “Indeed, if IHS decides to pay for abortions in cases of rape and incest,” the USCCB’s lawyers wrote, “it should, in our view, require compliance with the reporting requirements that were put into place under the Clinton administration, requirements that remained in place from 1996 until their rescission in 2022.”
Additionally, American Indians have previously expressed that they do not want the federal government to set up abortion facilities on tribal lands. Stacy Leeds, a former Cherokee Nation Supreme Court Justice, rejected calls from Democrats to establish abortion clinics on tribal lands as a way of skirting the dismantling of Roe v. Wade. “It’s an overreach for people to assume, or presume that a tribe would want to do this in the first place,” Leeds said. She added that even if American Indians did decide to establish private abortion facilities, “It would have to not have any federal money because it would be restricted with the Hyde Amendment. And it would need to involve tribal citizens only.”
After the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2022 that the Constitution does not contain any right to abortion, a coalition of Democrats petitioned President Joseph Biden “to defend Americans’ fundamental reproductive rights, including their right to an abortion.” How? By setting up abortion facilities on federal property — including tribal land — in states that had enacted abortion restrictions. (READ MORE: Germany’s Bishops Are Approaching Schism)
Lauren van Schilfgaarde, an assistant law professor at UCLA and a member of the Cochiti Pueblo, pointed out that IHS is underfunded “really underserved,” resulting in increased infant and maternal death rates among American Indians. As the USCCB noted, “IHS’s focus should be on continuing to improve maternal and infant health, not eliminating regulatory provisions that ensure compliance with conditions that Congress has established for the funding of abortions.”
The proposed rule changes would only serve to increase infant death rates through the continued slaughter of the unborn.
