Judge blocks Trump admin's efforts to defund Planned Parenthood
The new order replaces a previous edict handed down by U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston last week. Talwani initially granted a preliminary injunction specifically blocking the government from cutting Medicaid payments to Planned Parenthood members that didn't provide abortion care or didn't meet a threshold of at least $800,000 in Medicaid reimbursements in a given year.
'Patients are likely to suffer adverse health consequences where care is disrupted or unavailable,' Talwani wrote in her Monday order. 'In particular, restricting Members' ability to provide healthcare services threatens an increase in unintended pregnancies and attendant complications because of reduced access to effective contraceptives, and an increase in undiagnosed and untreated STIs.'
Story continues below advertisement
A provision in Trump's tax bill instructed the federal government to end Medicaid payments for one year to abortion providers that received more than $800,000 from Medicaid in 2023, even to those like Planned Parenthood that also offer medical services like contraception, pregnancy tests and STD testing.
Get weekly health news
Receive the latest medical news and health information delivered to you every Sunday. Sign up for weekly health newsletter Sign Up
By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy
Although Planned Parenthood is not specifically named in the statute, which went into effect July 4, the organization's leaders say it was meant to affect their nearly 600 centers in 48 states. However, a major medical provider in Maine and likely others have also been hit.
In her Monday order, Talwani said that the court was 'not enjoining the federal government from regulating abortion and is not directing the federal government to fund elective abortions or any healthcare service not otherwise eligible for Medicaid coverage.' Instead, Talwani said that her decision would block the federal government from excluding groups like Planned Parenthood from Medicaid reimbursements when they have demonstrated a substantial likelihood of success in their legal challenge.
1:34
Planned Parenthood drops federal funding over Trump administration rule
In its lawsuit, Planned Parenthood had argued that they would be at risk of closing nearly 200 clinics in 24 states if they are cut off from Medicaid funds. They estimated this would result in more than 1 million patients losing care.
Story continues below advertisement
'We're suing the Trump administration over this targeted attack on Planned Parenthood health centers and the patients who rely on them for care,' said Planned Parenthood's president and CEO Alexis McGill Johnson in a statement on Monday. 'This case is about making sure that patients who use Medicaid as their insurance to get birth control, cancer screenings, and STI testing and treatment can continue to do so at their local Planned Parenthood health center, and we will make that clear in court.'
The lawsuit was filed earlier this month against Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. by Planned Parenthood Federation of America and its member organizations in Massachusetts and Utah.
The federal department of health did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Previously, the department said it strongly disagreed with the judge's initial order that allowed some Planned Parenthood members to receive Medicaid funding.
'States should not be forced to fund organizations that have chosen political advocacy over patient care,' said the department's communication director, Andrew Nixon. Doing so, he said, 'undermines state flexibility' and 'concerns about accountability.'
Medicaid is a government health care program that serves millions of low-income and disabled Americans. Nearly half of Planned Parenthood's patients rely on Medicaid.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Edmonton Journal
3 hours ago
- Edmonton Journal
New York billionaire prepared to fund B.C. ostrich farm's legal battle against forced cull
A New York billionaire is intent on saving hundreds of B.C. ostriches from being slaughtered based on an order from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), believing they are crucial to medical research into immunity and treatment of viruses. Article content Red Apple Group founder, John Catsimatidis, told the Daily Mail earlier this month he is 'outraged' at what is happening and that he is prepared to fund Universal Ostrich Farm's ongoing legal battle. Article content Article content Article content Last December, the CFIA ordered the farm's flock of 400 birds be culled. It also fined the farm's owners after 69 birds died on the farm from avian flu in December and January. Article content Article content The farm took its dispute with government officials to the Federal Court last spring. The court upheld the CFIA's cull order, deeming it necessary in the ongoing battle against avian flu. Article content The farm then appealed to the Federal of Appeal, which in July reserved its decision until a later date. However, it issued a stay of the cull while it reviews the lower court's decision. Article content The farm had also asked for an order permitting it to conduct diagnostic tests on the birds and to suspend any directives from the food inspection agency prohibiting such tests, but the FCA judge denied both requests without explanation. Article content Article content Article content The nine-foot tall birds, which are native to Africa, became a passion project for Catsimatidis after he heard about Katie Pasitney, the daughter of the farm's owners and her campaign to save the animals. Article content Catsimatidis recruited Dr. Mehmet Oz, the head of U.S. Medicare and Medicaid, as well as Robert Kennedy Jr., U.S. health secretary, to help with his mission. Article content The battle over the birds began in mid-December when 69 ostriches are believed to have died from the H5N1 virus, or bird flu. Pasitney insists someone made an anonymous call to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency claiming that the birds had avian flu.
Winnipeg Free Press
11 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Harvard scientists say research could be set back years after funding freeze
CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (AP) — Harvard University professor Alberto Ascherio's research is literally frozen. Collected from millions of U.S. soldiers over two decades using millions of dollars from taxpayers, the epidemiology and nutrition scientist has blood samples stored in liquid nitrogen freezers within the university's T.H. Chan School of Public Health. The samples are key to his award-winning research, which seeks a cure to multiple sclerosis and other neurodegenerative diseases. But for months, Ascherio has been unable to work with the samples because he lost $7 million in federal research funding, a casualty of Harvard's fight with the Trump administration. 'It's like we have been creating a state-of-the-art telescope to explore the universe, and now we don't have money to launch it,' said Ascherio. 'We built everything and now we are ready to use it to make a new discovery that could impact millions of people in the world and then, 'Poof. You're being cut off.'' Researchers laid off and science shelved The loss of an estimated $2.6 billion in federal funding at Harvard has meant that some of the world's most prominent researchers are laying off young researchers. They are shelving years or even decades of research, into everything from opioid addiction to cancer. And despite Harvard's lawsuits against the administration, and settlement talks between the warring parties, researchers are confronting the fact that some of their work may never resume. The funding cuts are part of a monthslong battle that the Trump administration has waged against some the country's top universities including Columbia, Brown and Northwestern. The administration has taken a particularly aggressive stance against Harvard, freezing funding after the country's oldest university rejected a series of government demands issued by a federal antisemitism task force. The government had demanded sweeping changes at Harvard related to campus protests, academics and admissions — meant to address government accusations that the university had become a hotbed of liberalism and tolerated anti-Jewish harassment. Research jeopardized, even if court case prevails Harvard responded by filing a federal lawsuit, accusing the Trump administration of waging a retaliation campaign against the university. In the lawsuit, it laid out reforms it had taken to address antisemitism but also vowed not to 'surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights.' 'Make no mistake: Harvard rejects antisemitism and discrimination in all of its forms and is actively making structural reforms to eradicate antisemitism on campus,' the university said in its legal complaint. 'But rather than engage with Harvard regarding those ongoing efforts, the Government announced a sweeping freeze of funding for medical, scientific, technological, and other research that has nothing at all to do with antisemitism.' The Trump administration denies the cuts were made in retaliation, saying the grants were under review even before the demands were sent in April. It argues the government has wide discretion to cancel federal contracts for policy reasons. The funding cuts have left Harvard's research community in a state of shock, feeling as if they are being unfairly targeted in a fight has nothing to do with them. Some have been forced to shutter labs or scramble to find non-government funding to replace lost money. In May, Harvard announced that it would put up at least $250 million of its own money to continue research efforts, but university President Alan Garber warned of 'difficult decisions and sacrifices' ahead. Ascherio said the university was able to pull together funding to pay his researchers' salaries until next June. But he's still been left without resources needed to fund critical research tasks, like lab work. Even a year's delay can put his research back five years, he said. Knowledge lost in funding freeze 'It's really devastating,' agreed Rita Hamad, the director of the Social Policies for Health Equity Research Center at Harvard, who had three multiyear grants totaling $10 million canceled by the Trump administration. The grants funded research into the impact of school segregation on heart health, how pandemic-era policies in over 250 counties affected mental health, and the role of neighborhood factors in dementia. At the School of Public Health, where Hamad is based, 190 grants have been terminated, affecting roughly 130 scientists. 'Just thinking about all the knowledge that's not going to be gained or that is going to be actively lost,' Hamad said. She expects significant layoffs on her team if the funding freeze continues for a few more months. 'It's all just a mixture of frustration and anger and sadness all the time, every day.' John Quackenbush, a professor of computational biology and bioinformatics at the School of Public Health, has spent the past few months enduring cuts on multiple fronts. In April, a multimillion dollar grant was not renewed, jeopardizing a study into the role sex plays in disease. In May, he lost about $1.2 million in federal funding for in the coming year due to the Harvard freeze. Four departmental grants worth $24 million that funded training of doctoral students also were cancelled as part of the fight with the Trump administration, Quackenbush said. 'I'm in a position where I have to really think about, 'Can I revive this research?'' he said. 'Can I restart these programs even if Harvard and the Trump administration reached some kind of settlement? If they do reach a settlement, how quickly can the funding be turned back on? Can it be turned back on?' The researchers all agreed that the funding cuts have little or nothing to do with the university's fight against antisemitism. Some, however, argue changes at Harvard were long overdue and pressure from the Trump administration was necessary. Bertha Madras, a Harvard psychobiologist who lost funding to create a free, parent-focused training to prevent teen opioid overdose and drug use, said she's happy to see the culling of what she called 'politically motivated social science studies.' White House pressure a good thing? Madras said pressure from the White House has catalyzed much-needed reform at the university, where several programs of study have 'really gone off the wall in terms of being shaped by orthodoxy that is not representative of the country as a whole.' But Madras, who served on the President's Commission on Opioids during Trump's first term, said holding scientists' research funding hostage as a bargaining chip doesn't make sense. 'I don't know if reform would have happened without the president of the United States pointing the bony finger at Harvard,' she said. 'But sacrificing science is problematic, and it's very worrisome because it is one of the major pillars of strength of the country.' Quackenbush and other Harvard researchers argue the cuts are part of a larger attack on science by the Trump administration that puts the country's reputation as the global research leader at risk. Support for students and post-doctoral fellows has been slashed, visas for foreign scholars threatened, and new guidelines and funding cuts at the NIH will make it much more difficult to get federal funding in the future, they said. It also will be difficult to replace federal funding with money from the private sector. 'We're all sort of moving toward this future in which this 80-year partnership between the government and the universities is going to be jeopardized,' Quackenbush said. 'We're going to face real challenges in continuing to lead the world in scientific excellence.'
Global News
17 hours ago
- Global News
Fraser Health wants whistleblowing ER doctor's lawsuit thrown out
Fraser Health has filed its response to a lawsuit from a whistleblowing emergency room doctor, and it wants to see the case dismissed. Dr. Kaitlin Stockton filed the suit earlier this year, claiming the health authority singled her out and retaliated against her after she publicly highlighted unsafe working conditions and hospital overcrowding. In November of last year, Stockton posted a notice in the ER waiting area of Eagle Ridge Hospital in Port Moody, warning patients of a shortage of capacity and resources. 1:10 Residents demand action after Delta Hospital emergency room closed overnight The suit claims that Stockton obtained permission from her local department head to post the notice, but that instead of addressing the problematic conditions, the health authority issued a statement calling the signs 'false,' then used CCTV footage to identify her, then to allegedly threaten her right to work in the hospital and to file a complaint with her regulator. Story continues below advertisement In its response to the suit, Fraser Health argues the court does not have the jurisdiction to hear the case, and says it should instead be dealt with through internal arbitration and mediation. Get weekly health news Receive the latest medical news and health information delivered to you every Sunday. Sign up for weekly health newsletter Sign Up By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy Stockton, however, told Global News she deliberately filed the suit in the court system with the goal of ensuring transparency. 'There's been huge public outcry about this case, and, unfortunately, it hasn't really moved the needle — we continue to see outrageously unsafe conditions for patients, for providers,' she said. 'This just puts extra scrutiny on that reality that we're facing right now, so I think it's in the best interest of Fraser Health to make this story go away.' Kathryn Marshall, Stockton's lawyer, said it's common for large companies and organizations to push for private arbitration, which she said can keep sensitive or controversial information from reaching the public. 0:56 Health-care worker assaulted at Port Moody hospital She contrasted that with the Canadian court system, in which both court proceedings and documents filed in court are open and accessible to the public. Story continues below advertisement 'So I think the question that needs to be raised to Fraser Health authority is why? Why are they trying to take this case out of the public sphere and have it dealt with behind closed doors? What's the reason?' she said. 'I think the answer is obvious to me, but I'd like to hear them say it, which is that they don't want public scrutiny or exposure on the issues that are in Dr. Stockman's case. They want to hide that.' Earlier this week, the emergency room at Delta Hospital was closed overnight with short notice, the latest in an ongoing series of ER closures and diversions throughout the province. 2:14 Former Fraser Health CEO's severance package sparks debate Those closures have typically been attributed to a shortage of available physicians or nurses. Stockton said she remains compelled to speak out publicly because the province's health care system is in 'freefall.' Story continues below advertisement 'We're no longer dealing with cracks in the foundation, like the roof has fallen in. This is unacceptable,' she said. 'And unfortunately, it's going to get worse unless health authorities and our government, first of all, acknowledge that there is a problem and secondly, pour all of their resources and energy into retaining the physicians and nurses that we have … who are leaving in record numbers because the workplace is not safe.' Asked for an interview, Fraser Health said it did not comment on pending litigation. –with files from Rumina Daya
