SCOTUS Hears SC’s Defense For Defunding Planned Parenthood

The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments on Tuesday to determine if states have a right to refuse baby-killing businesses the taxpayer dollars sustaining Medicaid.

In Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, SCOTUS is slated to weigh whether South Carolina is within its rights to find Planned Parenthood ineligible for Medicaid funding due to its abortion obsession.

At South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster’s direction, the state sought to redirect Medicaid funds that would normally end up in Planned Parenthood’s pockets to facilities focused on better, more comprehensive healthcare instead of ending lives. Planned Parenthood strongly opposed this obstacle to the flow of federal tax dollars, which no doubt help sustain its existence, and sued to stop it.

According to South Carolina’s legal representation John Bursch, senior counsel and vice president of appellate advocacy at Alliance Defending Freedom, South Carolina “should be free” to honor the majority of Americans’ opposition to taxpayer-funded abortions and be selective with which providers get Americans’ hard-earned dollars.

“Taxpayer dollars should never be used to fund facilities that profit off abortion and distribute dangerous gender-transition drugs to minors,” Bursch said in a statement before arguments began. “State officials should be free to determine that Planned Parenthood—a multi-billion-dollar activist organization—is not a real healthcare provider and is not qualified to receive taxpayer funding through Medicaid.”

Three of the Democrat-nominated justices including Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson, tried to turn the rights conversation on its head and argue that abortion businesses like Planned Parenthood are more than entitled to funding if a Medicaid beneficiary chooses the abortion giant as her provider.

Nicole Saharsky, the counsel representing Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, also tried to argue that the “individual dignity and individual economy” her client touts for Medicaid recipients is supposed to give them “the same thing people with private insurance enjoy.”

As Bursch noted, however, much like a private insurance company determines which doctors are within the network, the Palmetto State should have the authority to disqualify abortion giant Planned Parenthood as a covered option for Medicaid patients.

There are plenty of good reasons states might defund Planned Parenthood. In addition to ending unborn lives or botching their attempts to do so, the biggest abortion business in the country has a history of allegedly flouting federal law and wasting tax dollars, dispensing castrating drugs to confused minors, reportedly trafficking baby body parts, enabling abusers, allegedly performing unlicensed procedures and violating health and safety standards, opposing free speech, and conducting procedures that have resulted in mothers’ deaths.

South Carolina’s case for denying Planned Parenthood taxpayer funding found support among the 18 states, the federal government, several members of Congress, practicing South Carolina medical practitioners, and pro-life activists who all submitted friend-of-the-court briefs.

“Congress didn’t intend to allow Medicaid recipients to drag states into federal court to challenge those decisions—nor did Congress intend for federal courts to second-guess states’ decisions about which providers are qualified to receive Medicaid funding,” Bursch concluded in a statement. “We are urging the Supreme Court to restore the ability of states to steward limited public resources to best serve their citizens.”