Trump admin freezes Title X funding to Planned Parenthood in Oklahoma
Planned Parenthood Great Plains (PPGP) was informed on Monday that the Trump administration has put Title X funds to Planned Parenthood health centers in Missouri and Oklahoma on hold.
'It's really unfortunate that in this moment, politics is overshadowing the critical care that we offer,' said Emily Wales, president and CEO of PPGP.
PPGP says the decision could have a big impact on Oklahomans and their health.
'You're taking a vulnerable population and making them even more vulnerable to complications and risk of death,' said Dr. Dana Stone, OBGYN.
Title X is the nation's only federal program helping low income communities access sexual and reproductive care.
'Title X has been around for decades and it's really a unique program in that it's had bipartisan support to ensure that low income communities are able to access contraception, STI testing and healthcare,' said Wales.
Title X funding cannot be used for abortion care.
'Planned Parenthood in Oklahoma can't do abortions any longer anyway. It's illegal in the state, so none of that goes to support any abortion care in the state,' said Dr. Stone.
Dr. Stone believes Oklahomans will suffer.
DOGE-OK releases first report, plans to return $157M in federal health grants
'High rates of unplanned pregnancy and complications of pregnancy as a result. They also do a lot of sexually transmitted infection screening and Oklahoma's one of the higher states in those rates,' said Dr. Stone.
Cancers could also go undetected.
'Oklahoma already has high rates of cervical cancer. As soon as you don't have those pap smear screenings, we see higher rates of cervical cancer. People get clinical breast exams with these funds as well,' said Dr. Stone.
The notice from the Trump Administration is requesting information to evaluate possible violations of grant terms with the President's Executive Order 14218, 'Ending Taxpayer Subsidization of Open Borders.'
The order declares that undocumented immigrants are prohibited from obtaining most taxpayer-funded benefits.
PPGP now has to respond to the Trump Administration.
'We have to provide some information about our investment in health equity and trying to make sure that people have access to critical services, no matter where they live, no matter their race or sexual orientation,' said Wales.
The administration will then decide if the funding is terminated.
'If at some point we are notified that we're not in the program, we will communicate that to patients, but even then, Planned Parenthood isn't going anywhere,' said Wales.
Planned Parenthood will continue to explore other resources to continue providing financial support.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
32 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Appeals court allows Trump to end temporary protections for migrants from Central America and Nepal
SAN FRANCISCO — A federal appeals court on Wednesday sided with the Trump administration and stayed a lower court's order keeping in place temporary protections for 60,000 migrants from Central America and Nepal. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco granted the emergency stay pending an appeal as immigrants rights advocates allege that the administration acted unlawfully in ending Temporary Protected Status designations for people from Honduras, Nicaragua and Nepal.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Illinois Governor Signs First-in-Midwest Crypto Consumer Protection Laws
Illinois became the first state in the Midwest to pass comprehensive safeguards for crypto users on Monday, as Governor J.B. Pritzker signed two bills aimed at curbing fraud in a market where residents lost more than a quarter-billion dollars last year. 'While the Trump Administration is letting crypto bros write federal policy, Illinois is implementing common-sense protections for investors and consumers,' Pritzker said in a Monday statement. The Digital Assets and Consumer Protection Act (SB1797) and the Digital Asset Kiosk Act (SB2319) were signed into law after months of debate in Springfield. Together, they set new rules for digital asset businesses and impose restrictions on crypto ATMs, where scams have become increasingly common. Both bills were sponsored entirely by Democratic lawmakers. Illinois' new crypto framework The new framework gives the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation authority to oversee exchanges and wallet providers while requiring companies to adopt cybersecurity safeguards, anti-fraud measures, and basic consumer service standards. State Senator Mark Walker first introduced SB1797 in February, with the legislation gaining momentum in April when the Illinois Senate Executive Committee passed it in an 8-4 vote. Walker then cited mounting crypto fraud losses, noting that Illinois residents lost over $163 million in 2023 alone. The FBI reported that Illinois residents lost $272 million to crypto fraud in 2024, recording 4,657 crypto-related complaints, making it the most common form of financial crime in the state. The state also ranked fifth in the nation for crypto fraud complaints and losses, behind only California, Florida, Texas, and New York. Crypto kiosk crackdown SB2319 requires ATM operators to register with state regulators, cap transaction fees at 18%, limit daily transactions for new customers to $2,500, and issue full refunds to victims of scams. Some provisions, including kiosk refunds, take effect immediately, while businesses have until July 1, 2027, to register with the state. Illinois currently hosts about 1,482 crypto ATMs, up from around 1,687 in 2022, with installations beginning in 2014, according to Coin ATM Radar. FinCEN Issues Warning on Bitcoin ATMs Used in Scams Federal crypto legislation backlash The governor's statement cited federal deregulation efforts and reduced oversight of crypto businesses under the Trump administration. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) warned last week that newly passed crypto legislation "supercharges President Trump's corruption," citing his family's crypto business benefits from billions in foreign backing. Warren Warns Crypto Regulation 'Supercharges President Trump's Corruption' Warren accused the crypto industry of writing its own regulatory framework and called current federal restrictions "weak, weak restrictions" that enable use by "terrorists and drug traffickers." Banking groups have also pushed back against the recently enacted GENIUS Act, recently warning Congress about loopholes that could trigger massive deposit flight from traditional banks to yield-bearing stablecoins. Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Kilmar Abrego Garcia highlights the Trump administration's criminal vengeance, too
Kilmar Abrego Garcia became the face of the Trump administration's cruelly incompetent immigration agenda, when the government illegally sent him to El Salvador and resisted remedying its unlawful action — until it finally relented and returned him to the U.S., where it had criminal charges waiting for him. In a new motion, his lawyers say that those criminal charges must be dismissed on the grounds of selective and vindictive prosecution. Writing that Abrego 'was charged because he refused to acquiesce in the government's violation of his due process rights,' his lawyers argued that his criminal case 'results from the government's concerted effort to punish him for having the audacity to fight back, rather than accept a brutal injustice.' Noting that he brought a civil lawsuit for his return while he was 'being tortured in El Salvador' earlier this year, they alleged that senior government officials responded by seeking 'vengeance' and beginning 'a public campaign to punish Mr. Abrego for daring to fight back, culminating in the criminal investigation that led to the charges in this case.' The motion argues that the campaign kicked off with Vice President J.D. Vance falsely calling Abrego 'a convicted MS-13 gang member with no legal right to be here,' with other executive branch officials joining the effort to publicly criticize him, including by calling him a terrorist. Abrego pleaded not guilty to the charges of illegally transporting undocumented immigrants. But regardless of whether the government can prove his guilt on those charges beyond a reasonable doubt if the case goes to trial, any reasonable observer can see the vengeful political motivation behind him facing those charges in the first place. Yet, can that reality lead to dismissal of criminal charges? As I noted when Rep. LaMonica McIver, D-N.J., recently filed her own such motion to dismiss charges that she assaulted federal officers at an immigration facility, selective and vindictive prosecution is a high legal bar to clear. Abrego's lawyers acknowledge this, writing that these motions 'are infrequently made and rarely succeed.' But they insist that 'if there has ever been a case for dismissal on those grounds, this is that case.' They recalled that the criminal case centers on a 2022 car stop from which Abrego was released without charge. The only thing that changed in the intervening years, they wrote, 'was that the government unlawfully renditioned Mr. Abrego to El Salvador, and he challenged that illegal conduct. As a matter of timing, it is clear that it was that lawsuit — and its effects on the government — that prompted the government to reevaluate the 2022 traffic stop and bring this case.' The government will have a chance to respond before the judge overseeing the case in Tennessee weighs in. Before deciding on such motions, judges can order discovery and an evidentiary hearing to assist in their decision. Presumably, the administration doesn't want a formal public airing focused on its motivations, so expect the Justice Department to argue in its forthcoming response that Abrego's motion should be denied without a hearing or discovery. The motion comes ahead of Abrego's potential release from criminal custody on Friday, though the government has signaled its intent to put him back into immigration proceedings, which would move forward in Maryland (where he had been living), separately from the Tennessee criminal case. As for the criminal case, it would be a fitting end for a court to dismiss it based on recognizing the vengeance that's plain for all to see. And though, as Abrego's lawyers noted, such motions are rare, there have been at least two recently, the other coming from McIver, whose charges also came in response to scrutiny of the administration's immigration actions. While we don't yet know whether these latest motions will succeed, if this vengeful administration continues along a similar trajectory in President Donald Trump's second term, such motions may no longer be rare. Subscribe to the Deadline: Legal Newsletter for expert analysis on the top legal stories of the week, including updates from the Supreme Court and developments in the Trump administration's legal cases. This article was originally published on
