iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Planned Parenthood Wins First Victory Against Defunding Laws

Planned Parenthood

First Posted: 06/27/11 05:33 PM ET Updated: 08/27/11 06:12 AM ET

Four states have passed legislation defunding Planned Parenthood so far this year, but the family planning provider is not going down without a fight. A federal judge in Indiana sided with Planned Parenthood against the defunding law on Friday, blocking its implementation, and now the legal battle is moving to Kansas.

After a month of court hearings, Judge Tanya Walton Pratt decided to grant a preliminary injunction against a new law that blocks Planned Parenthood of Indiana (PPIN) from participating in the Medicaid program. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services already denounced the defunding law in a letter issued earlier this month because the proposed change violates federal Medicaid rules by denying Medicaid patients the freedom to choose a qualified provider.

Pratt said the Health Department's disapproval of the new law, which could jeopardize all $4 million of Indiana's federal planning money, weighed heavily on her decision.

"Denying the injunction could pit the federal government against the State of Indiana in a high-stakes political impasse," she told the court. "And if dogma trumps pragmatism and neither side budges, Indiana’s most vulnerable citizens could end up paying the price as the collateral damage of a partisan battle. With this backdrop in mind, along with the reasons discussed above, the Court believes the most prudent course of action is to enjoin the defunding provision while the judicial process runs its course.”

As a result of the injunction, PPIN will immediately resume serving its Medicaid patients, many of whom had been using it as their primary health provider.

“This decision will have immediate, positive consequences for our patients and our organization," PPIN President and CEO Betty Cockrum said in a statement. “This ruling allows us to resume providing Pap tests, breast exams, STD testing and treatment and birth control to both existing and new Medicaid patients.”

Planned Parenthood said its victories in court and with the federal government bode well for the legal battles it plans to fight in other states. The Kansas-based chapter filed a lawsuit in federal district court on Monday that seeks to block the enforcement of a defunding amendment recently passed by the Kansas legislature. Unlike the Indiana law, the Kansas law cuts off all Title X funding to Planned Parenthood, so that it will no longer be able to provide family planning and preventive health care services on a sliding-fee scale to more than 5,700 low-income patients.

A staff attorney for the Planned Parenthood Federation of America said the law "impermissibly penalizes" Planned Parenthood because the organization provides abortion services, even though Title X family planning funds are already prohibited from paying for abortions. The defunding amendment also unfairly punishes low-income and uninsured patients by restricting their ability to choose a health provider.

“It’s disappointing that instead of focusing on expanding family planning and sex education programs, we are once again having to spend time responding to politically-motivated health care attacks," said Peter Brownlie, president of Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri. "Planned Parenthood will continue to stand up for Kansans’ right to access affordable, quality reproductive health care."

Planned Parenthood is also considering legal action in Wisconsin and North Carolina, the third and fourth states to pass defunding laws this year.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
Four states have passed legislation defunding Planned Parenthood so far this year, but the family planning provider is not going down without a fight. A federal judge in Indiana sided with Planned Par...
Four states have passed legislation defunding Planned Parenthood so far this year, but the family planning provider is not going down without a fight. A federal judge in Indiana sided with Planned Par...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 4,107
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (47 total)
04:30 PM on 07/15/2011
All PP has to do is STOP doing abortions IN-CLINIC!!! Seriously, why is that a problem for you all to understand? I am a liberal on almost every front, but if a large majority of U.S. citizens do not want to fund abortions, then that is the will of the people. No one is asking for women's rights to be taken away. Just not to fund an organization that does in-clinic abortions. (and don't blah blah blah about how taxpayer funds are not used. . .they go to the same org.). Just stop doing abortion keep your funds.
04:27 PM on 07/19/2011
Danny, you would have to pay for it through planned parent hood or the welfare system.
06:56 PM on 07/19/2011
Not if we start restricting welfare! Or at least drug testing recipients (as FL is now doing), making them look for work and/or do community service, etc.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tresco
Sistagirl Laughin' Thingy Award Winner!
10:19 AM on 07/01/2011
PP needs to make up it's mind about what it's function is.

Provide low cost medical care (except abortions) to poor women and accept public funding..
Provide low cost medical care (including abortions) to poor women and not accept public funding.
Become an advocacy group that focuses on winning elections and shaping public opinion. No public funding


The organization is going in too many different directions. It needs to focus on one misson and spin off the operations that do not fit that focus. The former parts will go on under a somewhat different name but everyone will know who they are and what their history is. The difference is that they won't have their hands tied by regulations and conflicts of intrest. Looks like a win-win to me. I'm really looking for solutions here. Do you think that could work: Why or why not? What do you thijk PP should do?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Seven Teenatheart
Tolerance, peace, and sanity. Be your own person.
08:28 PM on 07/02/2011
Why. They are legal as is.
Why should they suddenly change? Name one other private company that should have to jump through that hoop and why.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
CJWebber
I think we all love teachers.
08:50 PM on 07/02/2011
PP is very clear on what it's function is. The general public, on the other hand, has been confused.

None of the public funding for health care for women includes abortions. Abortions are paid for by the woman, or by her insurance company if they have one that will cover it. Federal funds don't go toward abortion at all. Never have, never will.

Women's health care has different directions. Do you propose they provide testing in one area and not the other? Which area do you think they should 'spin-off'? Other than the propagandists, who are possibly winning in such a scenario?

It needs to be made clear to the Average Joe that, unlike what has been said/implied, taxpayers are not funding abortions. For some reason there is confusion on this and it is skewing the entire debate.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
millebocca
veni, vidi, clicki
10:52 AM on 06/29/2011
reds:
you ready to help raise your oops constituency?
or are you gonna pull that boot-strap NIMBYism again?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
millebocca
veni, vidi, clicki
10:43 AM on 06/29/2011
as seen from the flip side:
robbing women of their most final, most private right to choose essentially gives all sexual predators reproductive rights
11:24 AM on 07/01/2011
What are you talking about? As the undercover work showed, PP is fine with statutory rapists using their services to cover up their abuse
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Seven Teenatheart
Tolerance, peace, and sanity. Be your own person.
08:30 PM on 07/02/2011
Agreed. If a woman is forced to have a baby - then her rapist can harass her for the next 18 years under the pretext of wanting parental rights.

This choice should be between a woman and her Dr.
10:27 PM on 06/28/2011
Audit and tax churches.

I don't like that churches use infrastructure facilities and they don't pay taxes. If they are a non-profit, then let it be transparent and they don't pay. If they make a profit, let it be transparent and let them pay. I'm tired of subsidizing churches. I'm very tired of it.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tresco
Sistagirl Laughin' Thingy Award Winner!
05:46 PM on 07/01/2011
Don't you see a down side to that? Think about it. It's better this way.
01:20 PM on 07/02/2011
If churches aren't taxed, they should still file tax returns as non-profits and have those made public and transparent. No, I believe transparancy is good for our country. Too many churches are super rich with power politically and without any checks and balances in their regard. And without anyway of seeing where the money goes. Follow the money, follow the money.

If they are non-profit, they don't pay taxes. OK. but still, I want their returns public and can be audited.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
KenClay
REPEAL DOMA
09:17 PM on 06/28/2011
I AM WOMAN HEAR ME ROAR...
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
KenClay
REPEAL DOMA
09:16 PM on 06/28/2011
L EAVE womens Bodies Alone..
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tresco
Sistagirl Laughin' Thingy Award Winner!
05:50 PM on 07/01/2011
Now you tell me.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
KenClay
REPEAL DOMA
09:09 PM on 06/28/2011
Euthanasia for republicants...
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:09 PM on 06/28/2011
What happened to seperation of church and state? I don't get why pragmatic and practical decisions need to be made through a very narrow view point. America isn't supposed to be about morality (which depending on which person you ask is likely to mean many, many, many different things). It's supposed to be about freedom.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
LittleOldLadyWho
Lifelong Liberal Democrat
04:45 PM on 06/28/2011
You would think that more people had a better understanding of a woman's cycles and bodies.  "Down there" doesn't cut it for women who are talking about their bodies!

Educate, educate, educate!!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tresco
Sistagirl Laughin' Thingy Award Winner!
04:12 PM on 06/28/2011
Now you're talking! We don't have the money for that crap either.
photo
camelias and sweet tea
Small drinking village with a shrimping problem
03:19 PM on 06/28/2011
I do not like or believe in abortion unless it is in cases of rape or medical emergency. but this is a free country and if some people want an abortion it is their choice and it is legal. I don't know why people always equate Planned Parenthood with abortion clinics, they are not abortion clinics, they do much more...
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
LittleOldLadyWho
Lifelong Liberal Democrat
04:20 PM on 06/28/2011
Because they are devoid of facts!!  And, vivid imaginations seem to rule the day!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:11 PM on 06/28/2011
I like your very open approach. What's right for you may not be for others. It's wonderful that you get that and aren't threatened by the differences in people around you. It's refreshing for sure.
photo
camelias and sweet tea
Small drinking village with a shrimping problem
06:28 PM on 06/28/2011
Thank You...faved Civility should be the name of the game on here.
01:51 PM on 06/28/2011
No one is surprised that a flaming leftie, affirmative action hack made this decision.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
BeVeryAfraid
Epistemophobia is treatable my little 0 fan poster
02:29 PM on 06/28/2011
"flaming leftie, affirmative action"  Who are you talking about?
photo
mmsuki
Fine; I evolved, you didn't.
02:38 PM on 06/28/2011
According to amwhoiam, very judge that makes a decision he doesn't like is a hack.
That goes with all extremist right-wingers.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
LittleOldLadyWho
Lifelong Liberal Democrat
03:23 PM on 06/28/2011
I vote for clearing up the deception that the GOP is riding like a fast pony, and into the ground!!
photo
camelias and sweet tea
Small drinking village with a shrimping problem
06:39 PM on 06/28/2011
Whoops your racism is showing. What has this got to do with affirmative action?
10:19 PM on 06/28/2011
Your nitwittery is showing, old woman. The judge is white.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cvermeulen9
And you thought it could never happen!
01:11 PM on 06/28/2011
I am for education and birth control. I am not for my tax dollars to be used for abortion. I feel that most everybody in modern times Knows that birth control prevents unwanted pregancy's. However I beleive that this goes much deeper and affect more tax dollars for women who know about birth control but still have unprotected sex to acheive a child. Thus then becomming eligable for HUD, welfare and free Medical services, free education etc. That is not what planed parenthood is for. That is not what we as tax payors intended. The solution as far as I'm concerned is yes, for planed parent hood by handing out birth control and education women. But after that time they still come in pregnant again they will not receive additional aid or subsidies, for the second child or any child thereafter. Some women use it as a means for living or in other words " to get into the system" for free medical care, housing subsidies . I'm sorry if this offends anyone and I'm sure that there will be some that will not agree or refuse to know the truth...but they are people who do not know the real truth or better put refuse to see the real truth. So yes to planned parent hood but much reduced in its role.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
kleighhoff
Relief is the order of business...
01:36 PM on 06/28/2011
Speaking of realizing the truth, did you know that federal tax dollars are NOT used to fund abortions??????
baej
They call us "right" for a reason
08:39 PM on 06/28/2011
And PP only hurt themselves when federal auditors found that in all but one state they were indeed "co-mingling" federal and private funds for abortion. Had that not happened this may have never come up. I'm all for abortion but they hurt themselves and , in turn, all women when they did that very thing. Keep up, please.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cvermeulen9
And you thought it could never happen!
09:25 PM on 06/28/2011
ah, speaking of truth.....Federal dollars are co-mingled with Planed Parent Hood and therefore abortions. Yes indeed it is the truth sorry if that offends you. Please check your facts before start calling people liars.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:25 PM on 06/28/2011
It is "against the law" for Federal Tax dollars to be used to perform abortions.

Ask the Republicans to prove to you that Federal money is spent on Abortions.

They get a copy of Planned Parent Hoods accounting books every year. Do you really think all of these years they have passed funding with full knowledge that a crime was being committed?

You are quit firm is condemning all because of a few, which everyone knows is not logical.

You speak of women, where is the mans responsibility in all of this. If a man had to take full responsibility for his actions and was required to always use a condom then just think how the drastically the stats would change. It takes two.

You will find abuse in every government program, yes, can you believe it, in every program!

Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, need I go one. What is your answer for those
programs? It is the Governments responsibility to curb abuse of our systems.
baej
They call us "right" for a reason
08:45 PM on 06/28/2011
The only thing they had to prove was that PP was "co-mingling" federal and private funds into one account instead of keeping it separate as they were suposed to. They hurt themselves when they made that decision by not being able to prove what was being used for abortion as opposed to what was being used for general heath care. Now everybody pays. So place the blame where it belongs - on PP.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PoodleMom206
Don't dream it, be it
01:05 PM on 06/28/2011
Like my post regarding the states' right to deal with illegal aliens--for whom they pay, this is the other side of the coin. The Federal government supplies Medicade money. If they want to give it to Planned Parenthood, the states have no right to say "no". I guess those state would rather pay a lot more money to care for the unwanted children who statistically are more likely do poorly in school, be under-employed and turn to crime. I thought Republicans were supposed to be the party of fiscal responsibility. Silly me! I guess pushing a moral agenda trumps responsibility. Sad, because patrons of Planned Parenthood are showing their responsibility.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
BeVeryAfraid
Epistemophobia is treatable my little 0 fan poster
02:30 PM on 06/28/2011
Pro-life advocates do not care about the children once they are born.
07:01 PM on 06/28/2011
How many children have you adopted?
I'll wager you don't even have a job.