Projected Health Outcomes Associated With 3 US Supreme Court Decisions in 2022 on COVID-19 Workplace Protections, Handgun-Carry Restrictions, and Abortion Rights

Maternal Sepsis

Sepsis is the second leading cause of pregnancy-related mortality in the United States. Early recognition, treatment, and escalation of care for the obstetric patient affected by sepsis mitigate the risk of mortality and improve patient outcomes. In this article, we provide an overview of maternal sepsis and address topics of maternal pathophysiology, early warning signs, diagnostic criteria, early goal-directed therapy, and contemporary critical care practices. We also present an overview of common etiologies of maternal sepsis and suggested treatment approaches.

Firearm Policy in the Hospital Setting-Recognizing Health Care as a "Sensitive Place"

Importance

Hospitals are hot zones of the US gun injury epidemic. To shelter these facilities from the dangers of gun violence, state legislatures have enacted laws to reduce the carrying of firearms on hospital premises. However, these efforts currently face serious Second Amendment challenges in federal courts. The ongoing legal battles, which have wide-ranging implications for patient and clinician safety as well as public health generally, are setting the stage for a Supreme Court case that may decide the fate of firearm regulations in US hospitals. A permissible pathway for advancing sensible gun regulation in hospitals is urgently needed.

Observations

Since the Supreme Court established a new constitutional test for firearm laws in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v Bruen (2022), states now face unprecedentedly high barriers to enacting health-protecting legislation regarding firearms. Post-Bruen, the Supreme Court requires that laws be consistent with "this Nation's historical tradition of firearms regulation." This means that states hoping to enact laws barring public carry of firearms in hospitals must demonstrate that hospitals are a "sensitive place" as a historical matter (ie, analogous to a location where firearms were traditionally restricted). By reasoning from analogy, it is clear several historical comparators exist for regulating firearms in hospitals. Although the hospital (as understood today) did not exist in the 1700s, it is sufficiently analogous to asylums and schools, to name a few examples. These settings all share a common denominator with the modern-day hospital: serving vulnerable populations or individuals who may be at heightened risk of misusing firearms.

Conclusions and Relevance

The Supreme Court's interpretation of the Second Amendment right to bear arms is threatening democratically enacted laws seeking to shelter hospitals from firearm violence. However, it is clear that hospitals and other health care settings are a sensitive place with compelling historical analogies. Policymakers' strategic deployment of the sensitive places designation, along with its rightful judicial recognition in the hospital setting, are critical to upholding laws that protect health care facilities, patients, and professionals from firearm violence-a conclusion consistent with the US Constitution, history, medical ethics, and common sense.

Trends in Maternal Death Post-Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health

This cross-sectional study examines monthly maternal deaths after the Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health decision.

The impact of abortion restrictions on American mental health

The overturning of Roe v. Wade has led to numerous states enacting new abortion restrictions. However, limited empirical evidence exists regarding the general mental health impact of these bans. Leveraging the nationwide Household Pulse Survey, we evaluate the impact of emergent gestational limits and outright bans on self-reported mental health status between July 2021 and June 2023 using a difference in difference approach. Responses indicate a significant increase in reports of mental distress after the institution of such restrictions. These effects appear to persist at least 4 months following a ban and are moderated by household income and education but not by sex, race, age, marital status, or sexual orientation. Less educated and less wealthy subjects reported greater mental health distress compared to wealthier, more educated groups. These results suggest that the institution of abortion restrictions has had broad negative implications for the mental health of people living in the US, particularly those of lower education and personal wealth.