How far can red states go to oppose Planned Parenthood? Supreme Court debates Medicaid restrictions
The Supreme Court on Wednesday debated one state's effort to keep public money away from Planned Parenthood and the rights of individual patients to sue when that effort interferes with their personal medical choices.
In Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, the court is considering whether Medicaid recipients in South Carolina have a legal right to challenge a state order prohibiting Medicaid funds from going to abortion providers. Before the order went into effect, patients were covered when they went to Planned Parenthood for non-abortion services, like cancer screenings and blood pressure checks.
During oral arguments on Wednesday, the court debated whether the federal Medicaid Act gives individual Medicaid recipients the right to try to force changes to a state's list of qualified providers through legal action.
At least five of the nine justices seemed skeptical of South Carolina's claim that there's no individual right to bring a lawsuit under the federal law.
'Justices, including Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., and Neil M. Gorsuch, pressed South Carolina's lawyer about the availability of meaningful recourse for patients other than litigation if a Medicaid recipient is denied access to their chosen medical provider,' according to The Washington Post.
The Supreme Court case originated in 2018, when South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster ordered state agencies to stop sending public funds to 'any physician or professional medical practice 'affiliated with an abortion clinic,'' according to The Washington Post.
The order expanded an existing prohibition against using Medicaid funds for abortion and aimed to stop abortion providers from accessing any amount of public money.
'The payment of taxpayer funds to abortion clinics, for any purpose, results in the subsidy of abortion and the denial of the right to life,' McMaster wrote in the order.
As a result of the order, Medicaid recipients are no longer covered if they use Planned Parenthood clinics for cancer screenings, birth control prescriptions and other types of non-abortion medical services.
Planned Parenthood patient Julie Edwards objected to the change and, along with Planned Parenthood, sued to block it.
Their lawsuit argues that South Carolina is violating the part of the federal Medicaid Act that deals with a patient's right to seek treatment from any 'qualified' provider, according to SCOTUSblog.
Edwards and Planned Parenthood believe the Medicaid Act created an individual right to use the medical providers you want to use. South Carolina officials, on the other hand, say the law deals with the relationship between states and the federal government, not with the rights of individual Medicaid recipients.
Edwards and Planned Parenthood won at the district and circuit court levels, where judges agreed that South Carolina's order is violating patients' rights.
'South Carolina — represented by the conservative advocacy group Alliance Defending Freedom — appealed to the Supreme Court last June, asking the justices to decide whether Edwards and Planned Parenthood have a legal right to sue to enforce the Medicaid Act. The justices agreed in December to weigh in," SCOTUSblog reported.
The Planned Parenthood case is the latest in a string of abortion-related cases to reach the Supreme Court in the past three years.
Since the justices returned control over abortion restrictions to states in June 2022, they've debated access to abortion pills and whether or not state-level abortion bans violate federal rules on emergency care.
The court unanimously protected access to mifepristone in the first of those two cases and determined the second one was 'improvidently granted.'
One of the Supreme Court briefs filed in favor of South Carolina in the Planned Parenthood case said that siding with state officials would fit the spirit of the 2022 ruling by making it clear that states can regulate abortion — and oversee abortion providers — without interference from the federal government or individual Medicaid recipients, SCOTUSblog reported.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
'Expensive and complicated': Most rural hospitals no longer deliver babies
Jun. 11—Nine months after Monroe County Hospital in rural South Alabama closed its labor and delivery department in October 2023, Grove Hill Memorial Hospital in neighboring Clarke County also stopped delivering babies. Both hospitals are located in an agricultural swath of the state that's home to most of its poorest counties. Many residents of the region don't even have a nearby emergency department. Stacey Gilchrist is a nurse and administrator who's spent her 40-year career in Thomasville, a small town about 20 minutes north of Grove Hill. Thomasville's hospital shut down entirely last September over financial difficulties. Thomasville Regional hadn't had a labor and delivery unit for years, but women in labor still showed up at its ER when they knew they wouldn't make it to the nearest delivering hospital. "We had several close calls where people could not make it even to Grove Hill when they were delivering there," Gilchrist told Stateline shortly after the Thomasville hospital closed. She recalled how Thomasville nurses worked to save the lives of a mother and baby who'd delivered early in their ER, as staff waited for neonatal specialists to arrive by ambulance from a distant delivering hospital. "It would give you chills to see what all they had to do. They had to get inventive," she said, but the mother and baby survived. Now many families must drive more than an hour to reach the nearest birthing hospital. Nationwide, most rural hospitals no longer offer obstetric services. Since the end of 2020, more than 100 rural hospitals have stopped delivering babies, according to a new report from the Center for Healthcare Quality & Payment Reform, a national policy center focused on solving health care issues through overhauling insurance payments. Fewer than 1,000 rural hospitals nationwide still have labor and delivery services. Across the nation, two rural labor and delivery departments shut their doors every month on average, said Harold Miller, the center's president and CEO. "It's the perfect storm," Miller told Stateline. "The number of births are going down, everything is more expensive in rural areas, health insurance plans don't cover the cost of births, and hospitals don't have the resources to offset those losses because they're losing money on other services, too." Staffing shortages, low Medicaid reimbursement payments and declining birth rates have contributed to the closures. Some states have responded by changing how Medicaid funds are spent, by allowing the opening of freestanding birth centers, or by encouraging urban-based obstetricians to open satellite clinics in rural areas. Yet the losses continue. Thirty-six states have lost at least one rural labor and delivery unit since the end of 2020, according to the report. Sixteen have lost three or more. Indiana has lost 12, accounting for a third of its rural hospital labor and delivery units. In rural counties the loss of hospital-based obstetric care is associated with increases in births in hospital emergency rooms, studies have found. The share of women without adequate prenatal care also increases in rural counties that lose hospital obstetric services. And researchers have seen an increase in preterm births — when a baby is born three or more weeks early — following rural labor and delivery closures. Babies born too early have higher rates of death and disability. Births are expensive The decline in hospital-based maternity care has been decades in the making. Traditionally, hospitals lose money on obstetrics. It costs more to maintain a labor and delivery department than a hospital gets paid by insurance to deliver a baby. This is especially true for rural hospitals, which see fewer births and therefore less revenue than urban areas. "It is expensive and complicated for any hospital to have labor and delivery because it's a 24/7 service," said Miller. A labor and delivery unit must always have certain staff available or on call, including a physician who can perform cesarean sections, nurses with obstetric training, and an anesthetist for C-sections and labor pain management. You can't subsidize a losing service when you don't have profit coming in from other services. — Harold Miller, president and CEO of the Center for Healthcare Quality & Payment Reform "There's a minimum fixed cost you incur [as a hospital] to have all of that, regardless of how many births there are," Miller said. In most cases, insurers don't pay hospitals to maintain that standby capacity; they're paid per birth. Hospitals cover their losses on obstetrics with revenue they get from more lucrative services. For a larger urban hospital with thousands of births a year, the fixed costs might be manageable. For smaller rural hospitals, they're much harder to justify. Some have had to jettison their obstetric services just to keep the doors open. "You can't subsidize a losing service when you don't have profit coming in from other services," Miller said. And staffing is a persistent problem. Harrison County Hospital in Corydon, Indiana, a small town on the border with Kentucky, ended its obstetric services in March after hospital leaders said they were unable to recruit an obstetric provider. It was the only delivering hospital in the county, averaging about 400 births a year. And most providers don't want to remain on call 24/7, a particular problem in rural regions that might have just one or two physicians trained in obstetrics. In many rural areas, family physicians with obstetrical training fill the role of both obstetricians and general practitioners. Ripple effects Even before Harrison County Hospital suspended its obstetrical services, some patients were already driving more than 30 minutes for care, the Indiana Capital Chronicle reported. The closure means the drive could be 50 minutes to reach a hospital with a labor and delivery department, or to see providers for prenatal visits. Longer drive times can be risky, resulting in more scheduled inductions and C-sections because families are scared to risk going into labor naturally and then facing a harrowing hourlong drive to the hospital. Having fewer labor and delivery units could further burden ambulance services already stretched thin in rural areas. And hospitals often serve as a hub for other maternity-related services that help keep mothers and babies healthy. "Other things we've seen in rural counties that have hospital-based OB care is that you're more likely to have other supportive things, like maternal mental health support, postpartum groups, lactation support, access to doula care and midwifery services," said Katy Kozhimannil, a professor at the University of Minnesota School of Public Health, whose research focuses in part on maternal health policy with a focus on rural communities. State action Medicaid, the state-federal public insurance for people with low incomes, pays for nearly half of all births in rural areas nationwide. And women who live in rural communities and small towns are more likely to be covered by Medicaid than women in metro areas. Experts say one way to save rural labor and delivery in many places would be to bump up Medicaid payments. As congressional Republicans debate President Donald Trump's tax and spending plan, they're considering which portions of Medicaid to slash to help pay for the bill's tax cuts. Maternity services aren't on the chopping block. But if Congress reduces federal funding for some portions of Medicaid, states — and hospitals — will have to figure out how to offset that loss. The ripple effects could translate into less money for rural hospitals overall, meaning some may no longer be able to afford labor and delivery services. "Cuts to Medicaid are going to be felt disproportionately in rural areas where Medicaid makes up a higher proportion of labor and delivery and for services in general," Kozhimannil said. "It is a hugely important payer at rural hospitals, and for birth in particular." And though private insurers often pay more than Medicaid for birth services, Miller believes states shouldn't let companies off the hook. "The data shows that in many cases, commercial insurance plans operating in a state are not paying adequately for labor and delivery," Miller said. "Hospitals will tell you it's not just Medicaid; it's also commercial insurance." He'd like to see state insurance regulators pressure private insurance to pay more. More than 40% of births in rural communities are covered by private insurance. Yet there's no one magic bullet that will fix every rural hospital's bottom line, Miller said: "For every hospital I've talked to, it's been a different set of circumstances." Stateline reporter Anna Claire Vollers can be reached at [email protected]. YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Scientists studying axolotls in hopes of learning how to regrow limbs
With their goofy grins and feathery gills, axolotls have become stars of the pet world and video games like Minecraft. But these small, smiling salamanders are also helping scientists explore a medical mystery: Can people someday regrow arms or legs? Axolotls are special because they can regrow body parts no matter the age. Lose a leg? They'll grow it back. Damage to their heart, lungs or even brain? They can also repair that! "This species is special," lead researcher James Monaghan, a biologist at Northeastern University in Boston, told The Washington Post. They have "really become the champion of some extreme abilities that animals have." In a new study -- published Tuesday in Nature Communications -- Monaghan's team used genetically engineered axolotls that glow in the dark to learn how this amazing process works. One mystery in limb regrowth is how cells "know" which part of the limb to rebuild. If an axolotl loses its upper arm, it grows back the entire arm. But if the injury is farther down, only the lower arm and hand regrow. "Salamanders have been famous for their ability to regenerate arms for centuries," Monaghan said. "One of the outstanding questions that has really plagued the field is how a salamander knows what to grow back." The answer may be a small molecule called retinoic acid. It's related to vitamin A and often used in skin-care products under the name retinol. The molecule acts like a GPS, helping cells know where they are on the body and what part to rebuild. Monaghan's team worked with axolotls that were genetically engineered to glow when retinoic acid was active. Then, they amputated limbs -- after giving the animals anesthesia -- and tracked their health, The Post reported. Monaghan said researchers monitored their health closely. "They don't show signs of pain or distress after limb amputation the way mammals might, and they regenerate fully within weeks," he said. When axolotls were given a drug that blocked the breakdown of retinoic acid, their limbs didn't regrow right -- an upper arm would form where a lower arm should be. Axolotls not given the drug regrew their limbs normally. This suggests that retinoic acid tells cells where they are and what part to grow. Higher levels of the acid seem to signal a spot closer to the body's center, according to The Post. "While we are still far from regenerating human limbs, this study is a step in that direction," said Prayag Murawala, a researcher at MDI Biological Laboratory in Maine, who helped make the glowing axolotls used in the study. Monaghan thinks this could help humans someday. "We all have the same genes," he said. "We've all made these limbs when we were embryos." The challenge is figuring out how to turn those same genetic blueprints back on later in life -- something axolotls can do but humans can't yet. "It's one of the oldest questions in biology, but it's also the most futuristic-looking," he said. Thanks to a growing interest in axolotls, especially among kids, this unique animal is helping to drive cutting-edge science. "It's a little surreal," Monaghan added. "You just see axolotls at the airport, axolotls at the mall. My kids are coming home with axolotl toys all the time, because people know what I do." More information The San Diego Zoo has more on axolotls. Copyright © 2025 HealthDay. All rights reserved.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Kristi Putnam steps down as Arkansas DHS secretary
Arkansas Department of Human Services Sec. Kristi Putnam discusses the state's waiver request for Medicaid work requirements on Jan. 28, 2025 as State Medicaid Director Janet Mann (left) and Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders listen. (Antoinette Grajeda/Arkansas Advocate) Arkansas State Medicaid Director Janet Mann will become secretary of the Department of Human Services next month as Secretary Kristi Putnam returns to Kentucky, the governor's office announced Wednesday. Mann serves as DHS' deputy secretary of programs as well as medicaid director. She has over 20 years of experience in healthcare and healthcare finance and previously served as chief financial officer and director of the division of medical services for the department. Putnam was deputy secretary of the Kentucky Cabinet for Health and Family Services when Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders picked her to lead Arkansas' Human Services Department in 2023. 'Over the past two-and-a-half years, Kristi has overhauled the Department of Human Services and brought much-needed reforms to the programs her agency oversees, including foster care, Medicaid, maternal health, food stamps, and more,' Sanders said in the press release announcing Putnam's departure and Mann's promotion. 'I am grateful that we have someone as qualified as Janet to take over for Kristi and seamlessly continue to make positive changes at DHS,' Sanders said. 'Janet has an encyclopedic knowledge of her agency and I know she is the exact right person to lead DHS into the future.' Sanders said Putnam will be returning to Kentucky. Putnam said her 'whole career has focused on serving families, and this move back to Kentucky is so I can serve my own family in a bigger way,' according to the release. Putnam described Mann as 'the absolute right person to step up as secretary.' The incoming secretary 'is one of the most creative policy experts I have ever known, and will take DHS to new levels of success,' Putnam said. Mann said she is honored that Sanders selected her and is looking forward 'to continue the great work Kristi and I have been able to accomplish in this administration.' As DHS deputy secretary of programs, Mann oversees the department's divisions of aging, substance abuse and mental health, developmental disabilities, provider services and quality assurance, eligibility, child welfare and youth services, as well as Medicaid. The department is the state's largest agency with a total budget of about $11 billion, and its programs serve approximately 1 in 3 Arkansans. Mann's background includes a stint as the deputy administrator for Mississippi Medicaid and as a consultant to several states' Medicaid agencies on finance, reporting, managed care, program integrity, organizational assessments and eligibility, according to the press release. She holds a bachelor of science degree in accounting from the University of Alabama and is a Certified Public Accountant. The governor's press release said she, Putnam and Mann have worked closely together 'to deliver transformational change to the people of Arkansas.' It cited Arkansas' 'welfare to work requirement,' changes initiated by the Governor's Maternal Health Strategic Committee to support pregnant people and a foster care and adoption initiative that has reduced the number of children in foster care. The release also cited the state's first-in-the-nation law preventing pharmacy benefit managers from operating drug stores in Arkansas and the newly approved ban on the use of SNAP benefits for soft drinks and candy. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
