Supreme Court hears South Carolina dispute over attempt to defund Planned Parenthood
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Wednesday will hear a dispute arising from an effort by anti-abortion Republican officials in South Carolina to prevent reproductive health care provider Planned Parenthood from receiving Medicaid funds.
Although the divisive issue of abortion lurks in the background, the case focuses on a technical legal question of whether those eligible to use Medicaid, a program for low-income people administered by states, can sue in order to pick their preferred health care provider.
Opposition to abortion drove the state's move to defund Planned Parenthood, which came four years before the Supreme Court in 2022 rolled back the landmark abortion rights ruling in Roe v. Wade.
South Carolina now has a six-week abortion ban, meaning abortions are rare in the state.
Planned Parenthood has facilities in Charleston and Columbia that provide limited abortion care in accordance with the new restrictions as well as other health care services including contraception, cancer screenings and pregnancy testing.
The case arose in 2018 when South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster issued an executive order that barred Planned Parenthood of South Atlantic, the local affiliate of the national group, from providing family planning services under Medicaid.
Julie Edwards, a Medicaid-eligible patient who wants to use Planned Parenthood services, joined the group in suing the state, saying that under federal civil rights law she could enforce her rights in court.
A federal judge ruled in her favor, and after lengthy litigation, the Supreme Court agreed to weigh in on the legal question.
In court papers, Edwards' lawyers cited a Medicaid provision that says patients can choose a "qualified provider" and noted that no one disputes that Planned Parenthood can safely provide the services she requires.
They rely in part on a 2023 Supreme Court ruling that allowed people to sue to enforce their rights under a different federal law called the Federal Nursing Home Reform Act.
The state, which has the backing of the Trump administration, points out that there are 140 clinics and pregnancy centers in the state as well as other health providers who accept Medicaid.
The Medicaid statute differs from the law at issue in the 2023 ruling because it has no "rights-creating provisions," the state's lawyers argue in court papers. South Carolina is represented by the conservative Christian legal group Alliance Defending Freedom.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
2 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Current student loan borrowers spared from Trump GOP tax bill
Lawmakers are hurrying under pressure from the White House to pass the overall Senate bill as early as this weekend with an eye on getting the entire package to the president for signature into law by a self-imposed July 4 deadline. At the moment, it's unclear if Trump and Senate GOP leaders can muster the 50 votes needed from within their own party given they cannot count on any Democratic support. Read more: Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' is shrinking in the Senate Republicans are trying to move the overall Trump legislative package under Senate rules that allow a simple majority to approve the bill. But to do that, all the provisions inside the legislation must directly impact the federal budget. Enter MacDonough, who has recently ruled out a number of other items that didn't meet that criteria but were seen as sweeteners for Republicans to vote yes on the Senate's version of the measure, including proposed changes to Medicaid, efforts to curb environmental rules, attempts to restrict federal judges' powers and plans to bulk up immigration enforcement. At issue on federal student loans is a GOP proposal to slash the number of repayment plans available to borrowers. Both the Republican-led House and Senate have been working on a new framework that would include one standard plan, in which borrowers would make fixed payments for 10 to 25 years based on their loan amounts, and another "Repayment Assistance Plan" based on income. Read about the House version: Republicans propose massive overhaul of student loans, Pell Grants According to a summary from Democrats, the Senate parliamentarian said only new borrowers can be restricted to just those two plans. Big changes are still on the way for federal student loan programs. But the parliamentarian's decision means they're more likely to affect new borrowers, rather than the over 40 million Americans who already have student loan debt. Read about the Senate version: Major student loan changes just came one step closer to becoming law It also means that the roughly eight million borrowers enrolled in SAVE - President Joe Biden's signature student loan repayment plan - will remain in limbo while waiting for a judge to make a decision about the program's legality. Read more: US appeals court blocks Joe Biden's student loan relief plan The independent Congressional Budget Office estimated in May, based on the House's version of the bill, that changing the repayment terms for current student loan borrowers could have saved more than $160 billion annually. Loan forgiveness change nixed; others under review The parliamentarian axed several other provisions that could have had big implications for student loan borrowers and colleges. She scrapped a measure that would've deemed some non-U.S. citizen students ineligible for federal financial aid. She also eliminated a change that would've disqualified doctors and dentists from a type of student loan relief. And she struck down a portion of the bill meant to expand Pell Grants to weekslong career-training programs. If Republicans can get enough support from Democrats on those items to pass the 60-vote threshold in the Senate, they could still pass. MacDonough is still considering whether or not to push back on a few of the bill's other measures, including provisions to make it harder for borrowers who've been defrauded - or whose colleges abruptly closed - to get their student debt canceled. Zachary Schermele is an education reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach him by email at zschermele@ Follow him on X at @ZachSchermele and Bluesky at @
The Herald Scotland
2 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Zohran Mamdani's race for NYC mayor isn't over as Eric Adams prepares
So the intra-party battle continues between progressive backers of Mamdani, a 33-year-old state Assembly member and democratic socialist, and centrists such as Adams and Cuomo. Minutes after Cuomo conceded his defeat, Adams - whose administration has been plagued by allegations of corruption and cozying up to the Trump administration - relaunched his campaign on X. Like Cuomo, who resigned as governor amid multiple scandals, Adams, 64, is trying to revive his political career. And he is not taking the high-road of a comfortable incumbent. "He's a snake oil salesman," Adams said of Mamdani on the conservative talk show "Fox & Friends." "He will say and do anything to get elected." There are others in the crowded race: Republican candidate Curtis Sliwa, best known for wearing a beret while leading the Guardian Angels vigilante group; Cuomo, who could stay in the race on a third-party line; and former prosecutor Jim Walden, running as an independent. On the steps of City Hall, Adams on June 26 relaunched his re-election campaign alongside a couple hundred supporters, including faith leaders. In the park nearby, protesters jeered at the mayor, with a few disrupting Adams' speech at points. Adams sought to paint Mamdani as an inexperienced politician who grew up with a silver spoon. Mamdani is the son of a Columbia professor and his mother Mira Nair is a filmmaker. "If you want to be a mayor of people who are going through a lot, you must be a human being that has gone through a lot," Adams said, as protesters blew whistles to interrupt him. He also argued Mamdani's policies, including free buses and rent freezes, weren't what New Yorkers want. "This is not a city of hand outs," he said. "This is a city of hands up." Adams: From 'Biden of Brooklyn' to cozying up to Trump When Adams was elected in 2021, the former police captain called himself the "Biden of Brooklyn," a nod to then-President Joe Biden, who also won as a moderate Democrat with a multiracial coalition in a party with an increasingly assertive left wing. Adams declared himself the face of the new Democratic Party. Then came the influx of asylum seekers, prompting a city emergency and leading Adams to attack Democrats in Washington, D.C., for what he saw as lack of federal support to manage the crisis. Later, Adams faced federal corruption charges, accused of taking bribes from foreign governments. Inside City Hall, his administration saw scores of resignations, indictments and raids of his senior staff for mostly unrelated corruption investigations, such as a bribery scheme involving his former police commissioner. Adams claimed without evidence that his own indictment was retribution for his criticism of Biden. After President Donald Trump was elected in 2024, Adams visited Mar-a-Lago, rubbed shoulders with senior administration officials, and appeared on conservative talk shows. The Justice Department dropped the corruption charges, with Trump officials saying the corruption case interfered with Adams' ability to enact the Republican administration's immigration enforcement and his ability to run for re-election. Adams has denied the charges. His polling took a hit, dropping to all-time low of just 20%. Recognizing his unpopularity within his own party, Adams dropped out of the primary. Free from federal charges, Adams is running on his record leading the city to lower crime, building housing and creating jobs. At the same time, he seeks to paint Mamdani - who focused on affordability in a notoriously expensive city - as someone incapable of actually enacting his policy proposals around rent freezes, free buses and universal child care. A cautionary tale from Buffalo Adams may be looking to New York state's second-largest city for inspiration. After India Walton, a democratic socialist and first-time candidate, beat Buffalo Mayor Byron Brown in the 2021 Democratic primary, Brown campaigned as a write-in candidate, with backing from business groups, Republicans and police. He won, before resigning in 2024 to run an off-track betting corporation. Much of the Democratic Party establishment either backed Brown or stayed neutral, instead of sticking with their own party's nominee. Jay Jacobs, the chairman of the state Democratic Party, refused to endorse Walton. Jacobs, a White man, likened Walton, a Black woman, to David Duke, the former grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan. He apologized for the remarks. Adams is on the ballot, which is more straightforward than needing voters to write his name in. How Adams will try to win Adams would have to reconfigure his multiracial base of working-class New Yorkers in the city's outer boroughs. Mamdani won on proposals to help those struggling with skyrocketing costs of housing and income inequality. Despite Mamdani's message, voters in mostly Black areas stayed with Cuomo, whose father Mario also served three terms as governor. Recent primary turnout also appears to have been lower in Black-majority parts of the city than it was in 2021, when Adams was on the ballot. To win, Adams would need to boost Black turnout in the fall. Walton, who is now a strategic organizer at progressive advocacy organization Roots Action, said Adams will likely try to Black churchgoers, who tend to vote at high rates, pointing to her Buffalo race. Some voters might still see Adams, like Brown, as "the devil I know," she said. She added the challenge for Mamdani is to reach out to Black voters, speak with influential clergy and addressing their wants and needs. Some observers are more skeptical of Adams' viability. Many of the mainstream Democratic voters who ranked Cuomo first will likely stay with the Democratic line and vote for Mamdani in the fall, said Basil Smikle, a New York City-based political consultant and professor at Columbia University. But the Democratic coalition has largely collapsed, in part due to generational changes with younger voters not as connected to political clubs or the traditional party machine, said Smikle, who once ran the state Democratic Party. It may take time for Mamdani to build support in Black communities that are the core of the Democratic base. "There are real questions about, 'Are you disrupting my ability to be successful, take care of my family?'" Smikle said. "With that in mind, there is probably some skepticism there, so (Mamdani) has a lot of work to to make up some of that ground in the Black community." Others key members of the local Democratic machine, though, appear to have already embraced Mamdani. After Mamdani won, state Assembly Member Rodneyse Bichotte Hermelyn, chair of the Brooklyn Democratic Party, encouraged Democrats to back him, even those who had reservations. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, both of Brooklyn, applauded Mamdani's win, but stopped short of a full endorsement of the presumptive nominee. Another question is whether the scandal-plagued incumbent can raise enough money to compete with Mamdani's army of enthusiastic small donors. Adams faces debt from his legal fees, as The CITY, a nonprofit news outlet, reported. Fix the City, a Super PAC funded in part by former Mayor Mike Bloomberg and several Trump mega-donors, contributed $24 million to elect Cuomo against Mamdani, seeking to paint the young upstart as radical and antisemitic. In an email, a spokesperson for Fix the City said the group was assessing the landscape and its options. There are donors who are interested in staying engaged in the race, the spokesperson said. Ana Maria Archila, co-director of the New York Working Families Party, which endorsed Mamdani and a slate of other left-leaning candidates, said they expect the same monied interests that backed Cuomo to move to Adams in the general election. "They only know one approach and that is to overwhelm their opposition with money," she said. "That is not going to slow us down." In the city with the largest Jewish population outside of Israel, both Cuomo and Adams have run for office purportedly to fight the rise of antisemitism. Adams is considering running on lines called "Safe&Affordable" and "EndAntisemitism." Cuomo sought to paint Mamdani as antisemitic because he does not endorse Israel's existence as a Jewish state. Adams is sure to do the same against Mamdani, who is Muslim and has faced islamophobic attacks in the race, But while Adams appeals to Jewish voters who are staunchly pro-Israel, results suggest many progressive Jews in Manhattan and Brooklyn voted for Mamdani in the primary. Less than 24 hours after polls closed on June 24, the New York Post, Trump's conservative hometown newspaper, editorial board declared: "Eric Adams has a real chance to stop Mamdani." What followed was more important: Cuomo needs to drop out, the newspaper declared. They also hinted Sliwa might need to step aside so Republicans can also unite behind a candidate who can fight the "socialist threat from Mamdani." The Post acknowledged Adams has had his problems. But, the editorial said, he's got a real chance now. Eduardo Cuevas is based in New York City. Reach him by email at emcuevas1@ or on Signal at emcuevas.01.
The Herald Scotland
2 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Supreme Court is dropping the rest of its decisions in one final swoop
Most anticipated is whether the court will allow Trump to enforce his changes to birthright citizenship while his new policy is being litigated. The ruling could make it harder for judges to block any of the president's policies. Other decisions will determine if health insurers have to cover certain medicines and services, like HIV-preventive medication and cholesterol-lowering drugs, and whether a federal program that subsidizes phone and internet services through carrier fees is constitutional. The Supreme Court still has to decide the last of three cases brought this year by religious groups. The justices will say if parents should be allowed to remove their elementary school children from class when storybooks with LGBTQ+ characters are being read. The court's pending opinion on Louisiana's congressional districts could impact the 2026 elections as well as affect states' ability to consider race when drawing legislative boundaries. The court has already issued major rulings on guns, treatments for transgender minors, "reverse discrimination," South Carolina's effort to defund Planned Parenthood, and how the Americans with Disabilities Act does or doesn't protect retirees and help students who need specialized learning plans. Here's a look at what's still to come: Birthright citizenship: limiting challenges to Trump's powers Trump's executive order limiting birthright citizenship has been put on hold by judges across the country who ruled it's probably unconstitutional. During the May 15 oral arguments, none of the Supreme Court justices voiced support for the Trump administration's theory on the matter. The administration says Trump's order is consistent with the 14th Amendment's citizenship clause and past Supreme Court decisions about that provision. But several of the justices have expressed concern about the ability of one judge to block a law or presidential order from going into effect anywhere in the country while it's being challenged. It was unclear from the oral arguments how the court might find a way to limit nationwide - or "universal" - court orders and what that would mean for birthright citizenship and the many other Trump policies being challenged in court. Preventing students from reading LGBTQ+ books and minors from viewing porn The court's conservative majority sounded sympathetic in April to Maryland parents who raised religious objections to having their elementary school children read books with LGBTQ+ characters. And in a case about Texas' requirement that websites verify users are 18 or over, one justice expressed her own parental frustration over trying to control what her children see on the internet. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who has seven children, said she knows from personal experience how difficult it is to keep up with the content-blocking devices that those challenging Texas' law offered as a better alternative. But while the justices were sympathetic to the purpose of Texas' law, they may decide a lower court didn't sufficiently review whether it violates the First Amendment rights of adults, so it must be reconsidered. Conservative challenges to Obamacare and internet subsidies The court is considering conservative challenges to Obamacare and to an $8 billion federal program that subsidizes high-speed internet and phone service for millions of Americans. The justices seemed likely to reject an argument that the telecommunications program is funded by an unconstitutional tax, a case that raised questions about how much Congress can "delegate" its legislative authority to a federal agency. The latest challenge to the Affordable Care Act takes aim at 2010 law's popular requirement that insurers cover without extra costs preventive care such as cancer screenings, cholesterol-lowering medication and diabetes tests. Two Christian-owned businesses and some people in Texas argue that the volunteer group of experts that recommends the services health insurance must cover is so powerful that, under the Constitution, its members must be appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. Racial gerrymandering versus Black voting power A challenge to Louisiana's congressional map by non-Black voters tests the balancing act states must strike, complying with a civil rights law that protects the voting power of a racial minority while not discriminating against other voters. The outcome will also determine if the state can keep a map that gave Democrats an advantage in the disputed district, a decision that could make a difference in what could be a close battle for control of the House in the 2026 midterm elections.
