By Aldgra Fredly
A federal appeals court issued a ruling on Sept. 11 allowing the federal government to enforce a law that would halt Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood.
This follows a preliminary injunction issued by U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in July that had blocked the federal government from implementing a provision in the One Big Beautiful Act.
That provision bars nonprofit organizations that provide abortions and received more than $800,000 in Medicaid reimbursements in fiscal year 2023 from receiving Medicaid funding. Among those affected is Planned Parenthood, though it was not explicitly named in the bill.
The First U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has granted the Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) request to pause Talwani’s order, allowing the HHS to cut off Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood.
“Notwithstanding the contrary conclusion reached by the district court after its careful consideration of the matter, we conclude that defendants have met their burden to show their entitlement to a stay of the preliminary injunctions pending the disposition of their appeals of the same,” the appeals court stated in its ruling.
The case stemmed from a lawsuit Planned Parenthood filed against the HHS in July, alleging that the legislation was designed to target its members.
In a statement, Planned Parenthood said the appeals court’s Sept. 11 ruling would block more than 1.1 million patients from using their Medicaid insurance at its health centers, and put 200 clinics at risk of closure.
“With this decision, patients and providers are in limbo,” Planned Parenthood CEO Alexis McGill Johnson said.
“We will continue to fight this unconstitutional law, even though this court has allowed it to impact patients.”
In a July 28 ruling, Talwani stated that Planned Parenthood had shown a likelihood of success in its claim that the law amounted to “an unconstitutional bill of attainder”—a legislative act prohibited by the Constitution that seeks to inflict punishment on an entity without a trial.
HHS argued in its motion to stay Talwani’s order that the Supreme Court had only invalidated laws passed by Congress under the bill of attainder clause on five occasions—each involving extraordinary laws punishing groups such as Confederates and Communist Party members.
“Halting federal subsidies bears no resemblance to the punishments—including death, banishment, and imprisonment—previously understood as implicating the clause,” the department stated.
“And in any event, the funding restriction refrains from designating particular individuals for punishment and instead adopts a generally applicable definition of prohibited entities that focuses on future activity.”
The Epoch Times sought comment from the HHS regarding the court ruling, but did not receive a response by publication time.
Reuters contributed to this report.
