Court Refuses to Hear Medicaid-Funding PP Case

By Anne Fox, President, MCFL


Do you notice people are hysterical about the Court's refusal to take cases where lower courts overturned state bans on Planned Parenthood funding? Many recent headlines claim that the Court has given Planned Parenthood a Constitutional right to be funded.

Much as we would like the Court to have taken these cases, let us keep perspective.  As Justice Thomas says in his balanced response, “But these cases are not about abortion rights.  They are about private rights of action under the Medicaid Act.  Resolving the question presented here would not even affect Planned Parenthood's ability to challenge the states' decisions; it concerns only the rights of individual Medicaid patients to bring their own suits.”

Rick Moran says at American Thinker:

"Thomas is clearly miffed... 

...and his reaction mirrors that of many in the pro-life community.  But historically, the Court is uncomfortable with taking on an issue before the lower courts have had their say.  The appeals process will continue, and I expect that eventually, the issue will be revisited by the Court.

"This issue is far from being resolved, which is why the states are likely to get a second bite at the apple.  The refusal of the Supreme Court to hear the Planned Parenthood defunding issue is only round one.  The states involved in this effort are likely to go the distance in asserting their authority over Planned Parenthood and other health care providers who perform abortion on demand." 

One of the states involved is Louisiana.  Our friend, Ben Clapper, Executive Director of Louisiana Right to Life agrees, “We expect future legal cases on the important question of taxpayer funds lining the pockets of the abortion industry. We look forward to the Supreme Court deciding that it is the right of the state to put a firewall between tax dollars and the business of abortion.”

There are enough things over which to be justly outraged... We don't need to create a storm over this. In fact, this may be good precedent for later cases settled more strongly in favor of human lives, and on better judicial principles.


Be the first to comment

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.