U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston said the government must continue to reimburse Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood despite Congress and President Donald Trump signing the defunding in the Big Beautiful Bill.
The plaintiffs include Planned Parenthood of America, Planned Parenthood of Massachusetts, and Planned Parenthood of Utah.
Talwani’s ruling is a permanent block, replacing her previous preliminary injunction.
Talwani also ruled that the plaintiffs “demonstrated a substantial likelihood of success on Plaintiffs’ Bill of Attainder claim.”
A Bill of Attainder claim refers to the plaintiffs’ challenge to a bill because it allegedly punishes a specific individual or group.
The Constitution does not allow Congress to pass laws like that.
Talwani insisted the plaintiffs the three-point test:
Planned Parenthood’s evidence? The provision applies to nonprofit organizations that made $800,000 or more from Medicaid payments.
In 2023, Planned Parenthood received over $800,000 in Medicaid payments.
That does make it identifiable.
However, the defendants claim “that Section 71113 is not a bill of
attainder because it applies to at least two entities that are not Planned Parenthood Members and because it is based on future conduct.”
So…if it does apply to others and not just Planned Parenthood then the Bill of Attainder claim goes out the window, right?
(I’m still reading through the ruling so bear with me!)
OK, I can understand the Bill of Attainder claim.
But other reasons given by Talwani? Laughable, especially unintended pregnancies. I’m not kidding (emphasis mine):
Patients are likely to suffer adverse health consequences where care is disrupted or unavailable. In particular, restricting Members’ ability to provide healthcare services threatens an increase in unintended pregnancies and attendant complications because of reduced access to effective contraceptives, and an increase in undiagnosed and untreated STIs. Brindis Decl. ¶¶ 11, 58, 62–66 [Doc. No. 5-5]. Moreover, decreased access to contraceptives and the corresponding increase in the number of unintended pregnancies caused by excluding Planned Parenthood Members from Medicaid will likely result in an increased number of abortions. Id. ¶ 71. Restricting access to Member healthcare clinics will negatively affect more than just reproductive health; Members often serve as a source of primary care for patients. Id. ¶ 82. Planned Parenthood Federation reported in its most recent annual report that its Members provided 426,268 cancer screenings and other diagnostic procedures. Id. ¶ 84. Reduced access to screening services creates a likelihood that health issues will go undetected with attendant serious consequences. Id. ¶ 74.
Why can’t Planned Parenthood give out condoms and birth control pills for free?
Also, why does the government provide 40% of Planned Parenthood’s revenue?
Yes, I know about Title X, but still. You’d think with all the celebrity and Hollywood support Planned Parenthood has, it wouldn’t need federal funds for anything.
All that funding and support also nulls this argument:
The record supports Plaintiffs’ contention that Section 71113 will force Planned Parenthood Members to turn away Medicaid patients, and lost revenue from Medicaid programs will force Member health centers to reduce hours and may cause some health centers to close.
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY