Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Love, Joy, Feminism

Home
Nonreligious
What’s Behind the Supreme Court’s Decision on Planned Parenthood Funding

What’s Behind the Supreme Court’s Decision on Planned Parenthood Funding

Last updated on: December 17, 2018 at 9:05 am by Libby Anne

What’s Behind the Supreme Court’s Decision on Planned Parenthood Funding 2018-12-17T09:05:28-04:00 Libby Anne

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Breaking news:

The Supreme Court refused Monday to consider efforts by Republican-led states to defund Planned Parenthood.

Despite its new, more conservative tilt, the court let stand federal appeals court rulings that allowed the reproductive health organization’s patients to contest laws in Louisiana and Kansas that stripped its Medicaid funds.

The court’s refusal to hear the case represents a setback for conservative interest groups in many states that have sought aggressive action against Planned Parenthood and abortion providers in general.

It may seem odd, but in the U.S. the Supreme Court can make a statement simply by refusing to hear a case. This is because if the Supreme Court refuses to hear a case, the decision of the lower court is affirmed—in this case, the federal appeals court, which found for Planned Parenthood and blocked Louisiana and Kansas’ attempts to defund Planned Parenthood by denying them Medicaid funds.

Today’s decision means that lawmakers in those states have no further recourse to plead their case, and that they therefore will not be able to strip Planned Parenthood of Medicaid funds.

As many of you will remember, efforts to strip Planned Parenthood of Medicaid funds go back to 2015, when controversial videos recorded by conservative activists claimed falsely to reveal that Planned Parenthood was selling fetal body parts for financial gain. Conservatives had a heyday with these deceptive videos, and lawmakers in Louisiana, Kansas, and a number of other states moved to “defund” Planned Parenthood.

Planned Parenthood receives Medicaid funds when it provides services to women who are on Medicaid, a form of government health insurance available only to low income individuals. Medicaid does not cover abortions, so efforts to strip Planned Parenthood of Medicaid funds affect only those Medicaid-insured women who visit Planned Parenthood for contraceptives, STD testing or treatment, or other services.

So, the Supreme Court declined to hear the case and in doing so reaffirmed the decisions of the lower courts against efforts to “defund” Planned Parenthood. Where did the various justices fall on this decision?

Three of the court’s conservatives – Associate Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch – dissented and said the court should have taken up the issue. Notably, Chief Justice John Roberts and new Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh did not join the dissent.

This is perhaps made more fascinating by Thomas’ dissent:

“What explains the court’s refusal to do its job here?” Thomas wrote. “I suspect it has something to do with the fact that some respondents in these cases are named ‘Planned Parenthood.’ That makes the court’s decision particularly troubling, as the question presented has nothing to do with abortion.”

Thomas’ claim that the justices who voted against hearing the case did so because they did not want to take a case where “some respondents … are named ‘Planned Parenthood'” makes little sense when the conservatives on the Court were divided among themselves. Kavanaugh was put on the court in part because anti-abortion activists saw him as a guaranteed vote for their side, but he, too, voted against Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch.

Mind you, I do not think this suddenly makes either Kavanaugh or Roberts, also generally considered part of the conservative faction on the Court, some sort of pro-abortion heavyweights. Far from it! It does suggest that there is at least some disagreement among the conservatives on the Court as to what is the best strategy to achieve what is likely still the same desired outcome. And that is interesting.

Lower courts have actually been divided on the issue of Medicaid funding. While most states’ efforts to deny Planned Parenthood this funding have been blocked, the 8th Circuit Court sided with the state of Arkansas in 2017, and the two Planned Parenthood clinics in that state are currently unable to receive Medicaid funding.

As noted on NPR:

The court not taking this does not categorically mean that states cannot prohibit using Medicaid funds for Planned Parenthood. States in the 8th Circuit, for example, can still do that because there is a circuit split, and the 8th Circuit ruled that Medicaid recipients don’t have the right to challenge who the state decides are qualified Medicaid recipients. States in the Eighth Circuit include Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota.

The existence of a split circuit makes the Supreme Court’s decision not to take the cases in Louisiana and Kansas somewhat more confusing. According to Wikipedia: “Some scholars suggest that the Supreme Court is more likely to grant review of a case to resolve a circuit split than for any other reason.”

Generally speaking, the Supreme Court likes to resolve legal questions that have resulted in a split circuit—and indeed, Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch reference this in their dissent when they write: “We are responsible for the confusion among the lower courts, and it is our job to fix it.”

The four liberal justices’ preference for maintaining the status quo, rather than an iffy Supreme Court ruling that might go against Planned Parenthood, is completely understandable—and seems to be what Thomas was referencing when he claimed that the reason the Court is not taking the case up is because it involves respondents “named ‘Planned Parenthood.'” But what about Roberts and Kavanaugh?

The votes of only four justices are necessary for a case to be accepted for review, so either Roberts or Kavanaugh could have had the case reviewed by flipping their vote, and only their vote. What game are Roberts and Kavanaugh playing, exactly? My curiosity is piqued.

The Supreme Court’s decision not to review these cases is not an overwhelming victory for reproductive rights activists—the best outcome would have been for the Court to hear the case and rule in favor of Planned Parenthood on the basis that states cannot arbitrarily decide which providers may serve Medicaid patients.

Still, at a time when the Court is fast moving to the Right, the Supreme Court’s refusal to review these cases still feels a bit like a victory—it means that in most of the U.S., Planned Parenthood can serve Medicaid patients without worrying whether they will be reimbursed for the services provided.

And that is at least better than some alternatives I can imagine .

I have a Patreon! Please support my writing!

Politics

abortion

Channel - Politics Blue

Previous Post

December 9, 2018

Lesbian Duplex 201: An Open Thread

Next Post

December 11, 2018 Neil DeGrasse Tyson, and Why We Can't Let Scientists Just Do Science

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Atheism Evangelicalism/Fundamentalism Family Feminism Homeschool Meta Parenting Patriarchy Politics Purity Quiverfull Social Justice Uncategorized Worthwhile reads

Select a Month February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What does the name "Samuel" mean?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Gifted by God Heard by God Saved by God Sent by God