Latest Pro-Life News

When Planned Parenthood’s lawyers went hat in hand to the U.S. Supreme Court this week in Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, they did so arguing that “Planned Parenthood affiliates provide essential medical care to low-income individuals through state Medicaid programs.” A senior Planned Parenthood lawyer told the media, improbably, “It’s not about abortion . . . it’s about people’s ability to access basic services like birth control, like well-person exams, like cancer screenings.”

What they aren’t telling the American public is how Planned Parenthood is willing to put essential care at enormous risk to keep taxpayer funds flowing to its abortion-and politics-centered business model.

The Medina case arose after South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster (who is now in his second full term, having been reelected with 58 percent of the vote) issued an executive order to halt Medicaid funding to abortion businesses. Planned Parenthood sued, and federal courts obligingly forced the state to turn the spigot back on. Currently, two appellate courts have sided with South Carolina and five have sided with Planned Parenthood. This prompted review by the Supreme Court, which will decide if states can administer Medicaid funding without getting sued by private individuals.

The Court should rule in South Carolina’s favor. Failure to do so would harm unborn children and women and girls, erode entirely legitimate powers of states, and endanger Medicaid itself.

Medicaid is a partnership between the federal government and states, which are entitled to federal health care funding if they meet specific requirements. While the federal government sets the basic requirements for how Medicaid must operate, states have broad discretion in implementing the program. That includes terminating contracts with unqualified providers. States do this routinely, and they need to do so without crippling legal risks. John Bursch, senior counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom, who represented South Carolina at the Court, explains, “When states enter into that contract, they need to know the ground rules, and the ground rules do not include these private citizen suits.”…