Planned Parenthood sues Trump administration over funding cuts in big bill | Planned Parenthood

Planned Parenthood continued the Trump administration on Monday for a provision in the Donald Trump National Policy Law which would withdraw the financing of health centers operated by the health care and abortion provider.

In a complaint filed before the Federal Court of Boston, Planned Parenthood said that the provision was unconstitutional and that its clear objective was to prevent its nearly 600 health centers from receiving Medicaid reimbursements.

Planned Parenthood said it would have “catastrophic consequences”, since health centers serve more than one million patients per year thanks to Medicaid, the US government insurance program for low -income people. Over 80 million people use Medicaid.

“The real conception of the parameter provision is simply to express disapproval, attack and punish Planned Parenthood, which plays a particularly important role in public debate on abortion,” said Planned Parenthood in his trial.

The trial continued: “Unhappy this volume of patients and reimbursements for the care provided will lead to the elimination of services, dismissed the staff and closings of health centers. The consequences of public health for Medicaid patients and non -medical patients will be disastrous and aggravated. ”

The organization estimated that funding could force around 200 Planned Parenthood clinics to close. The blue states, which house more people on Medicaid, would probably see a disproportionate number of closures.

Since it is illegal to use Medicaid to pay most abortions, Planned Parenthood clinics rely on the insurance program to reimburse them for the provision of services such as birth control, STI tests and cancer screening. But if clinics in blue state are forced to close, people will no longer be able to ask for abortions in these clinics – a possibility that has led certain supporters of abortion, including Planned Parenthood, to call the provision of Trump’s bill a “prohibition of abortion of the stolen door”. Planned Parenthood provides around 38% of American abortions.

“We are faced with a reality of the impact on the closure of almost half of the health supply centers of abortion,” said last week at The Guardian, Alexis McGill Johnson, Planned Parenthood Federation of Americas, in The Guardian. “It seems existential. Not only for Planned Parenthood, but for communities that rely on access to this care. ”

The Planned Parenthood trial requests the courts to declare the provision of the unconstitutional Trump bill for many reasons, or to preserve at least the funding of Medicaid for the Planned Parenthood clinics which do not provide abortions. The reproductive health giant suggests in the trial that Congress has not understood its structure when it adopted the provision. Parenality Planned is technically made up of a group of parent ships, Planned Parenthood Federation of America and nearly 50 regional affiliation groups which operate as independent entities.

Medicaid is supervised by the centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, which is part of the United States Ministry of Health and Social Services. This agency did not immediately respond to requests for comments.

Planned Parenthood is shaken by intense financial opposites. This spring, the Trump administration froze tens of millions of dollars for family planning suppliers who participate in title X, the largest family planning program in the country. Although many of these providers have since been restored their funding, a spokesperson for Planned Parenthood said last week that their subsidiaries had not received funding.

The United States Supreme Court also ruled at the end of June in favor of South Carolina in a case involving the state’s attempt to launch Planned Parenthood out of its reimbursement program for the Medicaid State. Red States may see that the decision as a blessing to their own efforts to finance Planned Parenthood.

Even if Planned Parenthood Monday trial succeeds, the organization will probably have to tackle the consequences of this decision of the Supreme Court for the years to come.