WASHINGTON, D.C. — On Friday, June 28th, LUCHA and Poder Latinx will host White House Director of the Office of Intergovernmental Affairs, Tom Perez, in Phoenix, Arizona, for a roundtable discussion on the recent immigration actions announced by the Biden-Harris Administration with LUCHA, Poder Latinx and Building Back Together Executive Director Mayra Macías. At 10:15 MST at the LUCHA Office, Director Perez, LUCHA, Poder Latinx and Building Back Together Executive Director, Mayra Macías, will meet to discuss 

President Biden’s new actions

 to provide relief from deportation to nearly 500,000 eligible undocumented immigrants married to U.S. citizens, 50,000 non-citizen children under the age of 21 and streamline the process for Dreamers and other undocumented immigrants who graduated from college to obtain temporary work visas. Director Perez, LUCHA, Poder Latinx and Ms. Macías will discuss how these new actions will affect mixed-status families across Arizona. Roundtables on the Impact of the Biden-Harris Administration’s New Actions on Immigration in Arizona WHO: White House Director of the Office of Intergovernmental Affairs Tom Perez Poder Latinx LUCHA Building Back Together Executive Director Mayra Macias WHAT: Roundtable discussion on the impact of President Biden’s new immigration actions on mixed-status families in Arizona WHEN: Friday, June 28 at 10:15 MST WHERE: LUCHA Office, 5716 N 19th Ave, Phoenix, AZ 85015 RSVP: Sign Up for the Roundtable on Immigration 

Here

PHOENIX – As in years past, the Arizona Attorney General’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit (MFCU) was a major contributor to the annual National Health Care Fraud Enforcement Action. The nationwide results of this United States Department of Justice coordinated action, was announced earlier today by US Attorney General Merrick Garland.  Attorney General Garland highlighted details of two of the many cases that the Arizona Attorney General brought during the focused case charging period of June 10-26, 2024. “I am deeply proud of the work of my office’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit,” said Attorney General Mayes. “The work they are doing is garnering national attention – and with good reason. Their commitment and dogged-determination on behalf of the people of our state is an example of excellence in public service and a testament to our ongoing efforts to protect Arizonans. Their achievements not only reflect their hard work but also highlight our dedication to ensuring justice and accountability.” During this two-week period, the Attorney General’s Office brought charges through the State Grand Jury against a total of 30 defendants for offenses that include: Drug diversion of controlled substances by licensed prescribers, vulnerable adult abuse by a licensed dentist, criminal conduct alleged to be committed by a dental imposter, and numerous cases related to behavioral health billing fraud and the associated schemes of patient brokering which have victimized our Arizona’s Tribal communities along with other vulnerable members of our population. The indictments filed by the Arizona Attorney General’s Office during the two-week enforcement period will be made publicly available after the defendants have been served. Background: In 2020, the Attorney General’s Office began investigating alleged crimes related to fraudulent sober living homes and generated its first property seizures in 2020 and its first criminal indictments in 2021. Since taking office in 2023, Attorney General Mayes prioritized these cases for criminal investigation and prosecution. Additionally, Attorney General Mayes helped ensured coordination with other state agencies in a joint government effort to stop criminal enterprises from exploiting vulnerable populations. To date, AGO MFCU has brought 97 indictments related to behavioral health crimes – 69 of which occurred during Attorney General Mayes’ administration. The Arizona Attorney General’s Office has been responsible for bringing about the forfeiture and/or seizure of over $140 million worth in cash, real estate holdings, vehicles, and luxury assets related to these alleged crimes. The Department of Justice press release is available 

here.

VIRTUAL – The United States Supreme Court released their decision in 

Moyle v. United States

, determining that patients in Idaho can receive emergency medical care, including abortion, for the time being, but failed to address whether the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) protects the right to emergency abortion care in every state. Following oral arguments in the case this spring, nearly 

6,000 doctors with the Committee to Protect Health Care

, hailing from all 50 states, released a letter asking the Supreme Court to uphold EMTALA’s federal protections nationwide. Ahead of the anticipated decision from the Court, physicians from states around the country gathered virtually to share 

what's at stake for their patients should emergency abortion care not be protected in all states under EMTALA

, which has ensured people can get life-saving medical care, including abortion, since 1986. They called for the passage of ballot initiatives in their respective states to ensure that medical decisions remain in the hands of patients, their families, and their physicians. 

View a recording of the call here

. “Many people may not know, or may have forgotten, that before EMTALA, hospitals could turn away patients who showed up at emergency rooms,” said Dr. Joseph Adashek, a maternal-fetal medicine physician in Las Vegas, NV. “For-profit hospitals would deny care to uninsured patients, forcing them to try to get care elsewhere, no matter the risk to their health. That’s why we’re working on a petition initiative to enshrine abortion rights into the Nevada Constitution. Passing this initiative would add another layer of legal protection for abortion care in the state, ensuring that patients have the freedom to make private medical decisions without government interference.” Dr. Cecilia Grande, a member of the Committee’s Reproductive Freedom Taskforce, is an OBGYN in Miami, FL, where abortion is banned at six weeks, and said, “One of my patients recently had non-invasive prenatal blood testing that showed suspected Trisomy 18. She then had an abnormal abdominal ultrasound. This patient did diagnostic testing but it would take multiple days to hear results and had to decide whether to wait for results or leave the state immediately for care. Even if she waited for the results, we would then need to get two doctors to attest that most cases are fatal, and then try to find a hospital that would allow us to schedule the procedure, which many are hesitant to do. That’s why I support Amendment 4, to get all politicians out of private medical decisions.” Dr. Emily Fleming, an emergency medicine physician in Whitefish, MT, shared examples of situations in which pregnancy complications put a patient’s life at risk, saying, “Vaginal bleeding from incomplete miscarriage or internal bleeding from ectopic pregnancy can quickly become life threatening. There is often very little time to act before a pregnant patient’s life is at risk. These patients are invariably scared, and often in pain. The details of each patient’s situation are unique and these health care decisions are incredibly nuanced. These decisions should be made by patients and their physicians, without external factors and uninvolved parties exerting undue influence. Without state protections for abortion care, Montanans could be denied life saving care. By passing Constitutional Initiative 128, we can enshrine in our state constitution the freedom for Montanans to make their own reproductive decisions about pregnancy and abortion.” Dr. Jennifer Smith, an OBGYN in St. Louis, MO, which has a total abortion ban, said, “Every week, Missourians are being denied abortion care and are being forced to carry pregnancies against their will, no matter the risk to their health. Women miscarrying are being turned away from emergency rooms, and doctors are being forced to wait for patients’ conditions to get worse before treating them. I have had a patient bleeding through her clothes in the second trimester who had to drive to Illinois for care because in Missouri we couldn’t prioritize her life over the life of her fetus. Thankfully, Missourians have an opportunity to pass an amendment to end our state’s cruel total abortion ban and put women, with their families and their doctors, back in charge of their own decisions around pregnancy.” Dr. Hiral Tipirneni, an emergency medicine physician in Glendale, AZ, discussed the need for the Arizona Abortion Access Act, saying, “June 24th marked the second anniversary of the 

Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization 

decision issued by the United States Supreme Court. Supporters of this decision purported to be leaving abortion access up to states. But physicians have seen what’s happened in states where abortion is banned, and it’s clear that attacks on reproductive health care didn’t stop with Dobbs. It’s time to get politicians out of our health care decisions, and let doctors do their jobs to protect our patients’ health and lives. I call on my fellow Arizonans to take matters back into our own hands, and put decision-making around health care back with the people, and away from government interference.”

A Statement from Center for Arizona Policy President Cathi Herrod, Esq.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision today to dismiss an Idaho abortion case without ruling on the merits delays any real answers. The federal law known as the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) requires emergency rooms to provide “necessary stabilizing treatment” to patients with emergency medical conditions. The Biden Administration has used the law to force emergency room healthcare professionals to perform abortions even against state laws limiting abortion. The decision means lower courts will have to grapple with the question before the Court would again consider it. I agree with Justice Samuel Alito’s strong dissent stating, “EMTALA’s text unambiguously demands that Medicare-funded hospitals protect the health of both a pregnant woman and her ‘unborn child.’” Any final decision on the scope of EMTALA likely hinges on the definition of “medical emergency,” which Arizona has well defined as a serious risk of substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function. Initial legal analysis seems to indicate that Idaho can solve this dispute by adopting a similar medical emergency definition in their abortion law. Today’s ruling has no impact on Arizona law.

 A Statement from Center for Arizona Policy President, Cathi Herrod, Esq.

Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes delivered her opinion today on a term that hasn’t posed a problem since its inception in 1999. For 25 years, Arizona doctors have known what a medical emergency is and when an abortion would be necessary to protect the life of the mother or keep her from serious bodily harm. While the Mayes opinion appears to grant doctors an unlimited ability to make a good faith clinical judgment to perform an abortion after 15-weeks gestational age, it’s important to note that judgment still must be made in good faith according to their clinical judgment. Further, ‘medical emergency’ is tied to major bodily functions that are physical in nature, not mental health related. It's important to note that one of the repeated lies peddled by abortion proponents is that women suffering an ectopic pregnancy or a miscarriage will not be able to receive care. Not so, according to General Mayes, as she points out on page 18 that treating an ectopic pregnancy or removing a fetus that is no longer living, meaning a miscarriage has occurred, are not abortions. Further, Mayes puts to rest a repeated false claim that a woman would have to be near death before the doctor could perform an abortion. Even Mayes agrees that is not the case at all. Doctors can perform an abortion on a woman who would suffer significant bodily harm without it.