The Supreme Court voted 5 to 4 against hearing the
case to determine whether or not States could defund Planned Parenthood as a
Medicaid provider. Their refusal to hear this case leaves States responsible
for Medicaid administration, but with no power to defund providers. The Dissent
by Justice Thomas is in the article below: Justice Thomas Accuses Colleagues of Avoiding
Abortion Issues as SCOTUS Passes on Planned Parenthood Defunding Appeal, by Lauretta Brown, 12/10/18,
|
The Supreme Court rejected appeals
Monday from Louisiana and Kansas in their attempts to defund Planned Parenthood
through their Medicaid programs.
The court was just shy of the fourth
justice needed to take up the case as three conservative justices, Clarence
Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch, dissented from the decision. Chief
Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh sided with the liberal
justices in the decision not to take up the case.
In a scathing dissent, Justice Clarence
Thomas implied that the high court’s decision had
to do with a desire to avoid the politically polarizing issue of abortion.
"What explains the court’s refusal
to do its job here?" he 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."
Justice Thomas pointed out that while
the dispute did arise over some of the organization’s practices related to
abortion, the central issue had nothing to do with abortion.
“It is true that these particular cases
arose after several States alleged that Planned Parenthood affiliates had,
among other things, engaged in ‘the illegal sale of fetal organs’ and
‘fraudulent billing practices,’” he wrote. “But these cases are not about
abortion rights. They are about private rights of action under the Medicaid
Act.”
"Some tenuous connection to a
politically fraught issue does not justify abdicating our judicial duty,"
he concluded. "If anything, neutrally applying the law is all the more
important when political issues are in the background."
Louisiana and Kansas attempted to cut
off Medicaid funding to Planned Parenthood
affiliates following the release of undercover videos in 2015 alleging that the
group engaged in illegal trafficking in fetal tissue.
Planned Parenthood sued in federal court
over the defunding attempt, claiming that the states were violating a Medicaid
requirement that patients be free to seek healthcare from any qualified provider.
The lawsuit centered on the Medicaid
Act’s “qualified provider” provision and whether it allows a challenge to a
state’s determination that a provider is “not qualified.”
Thomas called the issue “important and
recurring.” He wrote that, due to the court's inaction, "patients in
different States—even patients with the same providers—have different rights to
challenge their State’s provider decisions." He added that because the
Supreme Court has denied review in this case, states continue to face potential
federal lawsuits over changing medical service providers for a Medicaid recipient.
While Medicaid funding is not used for
abortion, money is fungible and lawyers for the states also argued that they
should not have to indirectly subsidize organizations that perform
abortions.
Planned Parenthood’s lawsuit prevailed
in lower courts and the Supreme Court’s refusal to hear the states’ petition
means that those lower court rulings stand.
Norb Leahy, Dunwoody
GA Tea Party Leader
No comments:
Post a Comment