Planned Parenthood Defunding

PUBLISHED: 4:25 PM 18 Jul 2018

Federal Court Rules Against Planned Parenthood Suit, Trump Admin May Continue Defunding Efforts

The judge ruled against the organization’s attempt to sue prematurely.

A federal judge ruled that Planned Parenthood could not file a lawsuit regarding Title X funding before the Department of Health and Human Services had made any changes to its polices.

Back in February, most of the nation’s focus on protecting children surrounded gun violence. However, the Trump administration made a worthwhile attempt to save innocent lives when it announced its plans to defund abortion agencies such as Planned Parenthood under Title X which has been previously funneling $50 million towards the company annually.

To this, the multi-billion-dollar business filed a suit against the administration, claiming its potentially detrimental effect on women’s health. However, since no legal move had even been made, a federal judge recently ruled against the suit, as Planned Parenthood essentially sued to ensure that taxpayer money continuing rolling in to fund its services.

In President Donald Trump and his administration’s efforts to move reproductive health services to focus on proactive measures to prevent unwanted pregnancy, the “U.S. Department of Health and Human Services introduced a new grant application that prioritizes sexual risk avoidance strategies, including abstinence, and the introduction of natural family planning in addition to artificial contraception.”

Note that funding under Title X is not to be used for abortion services, except for extremely rare and specified cases, “such as when continuing the pregnancy could endanger the life of the mother or when the pregnancy is the product of rape or incest.”

While the goal is to limit abortion unless absolutely necessary and promote other options to such murder, women would be no less able to seek medical care.

However, Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin claimed such lies, especially regarding women in low-income communities, and filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration in May.

On Monday, a Trumpappointed judge, U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden, ruled against the regional Planned Parenthood’s claims on the grounds that the court cannot “intervene before anything of legal effect has occurred.”

He further continued that Planned Parenthood has no merit to contest the Title X funding plan given that “the policy change was about ‘how an agency decision will be made and not a final agency action itself.’”

Calling the abortion chain’s motion “simply a solicitation of offers,” Judge McFadden noted that such could be reviewed “only after offers are accepted and grants are awarded.”

Still, that did not stop Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin from preemptively filing a suit, claiming that redirecting family planning methods towards more abstinence- and faith-based methods was discriminatory.

However, such had been done under both former presidents George W. Bush and Barrack Obama. Both, as both commanders in chief, focused on “related preventative health services,” as is mandated under Title X; however, Obama later overturned a Bush-implemented policy which “award[ed] grants to groups that partnered with faith-based organizations.”

Regardless of religious affiliation or otherwise, however, Planned Parenthood has already removed itself from “the funding equation” of an estimated “$50 to $60 million in taxpayer-funded Title X grants” if such is to be used for pregnancy terminating services.

The organization nonetheless claims the health and well-being of women as being its main priority, yet the president of Students for Life of America, Kristan Hawkins, rightfully described “the lawsuit as based in ‘greed.’”

She continued that the chain appears threatened by any other reproductive health alternatives that do not involve abortion, especially, she noted, if “people discover just how easy it will be to live a healthy life without them.”

Vice president for communications at Susan B. Anthony List, Mallory Quigley, agreed, calling Planned Parenthood’s premature lawsuit illustrative of the businesses ‘entitlement mentality’ simply based on the size of the organization which had been taking advantage of Title X funding being used as its ‘personal slush fund.’

While Title X funds are not to be used for abortion services anyway, as mandated in 1976, the previously filed lawsuit claimed that attempting to defund Planned Parenthood was the Trump administration’s attempt in dictating how Americans “should live their [sex] lives.”

However, abortion aside, the nation’s largest family planning company has otherwise failed to provide women, men, and adolescents with adequate reproductive care that does not involve terminating pregnancies.

This resulted in President Trump restricting “millions of dollars in grants to Planned Parenthood through the failed Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program,” with HHS spokesman Mark Vafiades noting “very little evidence that the program was successful.”

Even more important, the recent Title X considerations concern pregnancy prevention at its source rather than after the fact. Planned Parenthood, however, has continually proven that it cares more about promoting sexual activity rather than HHS’s goal, as it has been under recent scrutiny for controversial sex ed programs.

Its ‘Get Real’ program focused not on biology and pregnancy and disease prevention, but rather on ‘grooming’ developing adolescents to embrace their sexualities.

While the organization claims potential defunding would harm women who require reproductive care under Title X, its greed factor is relevant once more.

Planned Parenthood, “which does more abortions than any other company in the United States,” grossed $1.46 billion in 2017 from the slaughter of “over 320,000 unborn children,” making it the company’s most successful year.

If the Department of Health and Human Services can amend its policies, these horrendous figures will hopefully decline in saving lives.

Despite its appalling previous profitability, Planned Parenthood appears to be threatened by such a possibility, as seen in lawsuits which are being rightfully shot down.