Appeals Court Upholds Medicaid Funding Cut For Planned Parenthood

A federal appeals court delivered a major legal victory for President Donald J. Trump’s pro-life agenda on Friday, ruling that a key provision of his signature tax and domestic policy law cutting Medicaid funding to Planned Parenthood entities that perform abortions does not violate the Constitution.

The Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a preliminary injunction issued in July by U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani, who had claimed the measure unlawfully targeted Planned Parenthood and amounted to unconstitutional punishment. The ruling clears the way for enforcement of the provision, which the Trump administration argued was a lawful exercise of Congress’ spending authority. Reuters reported on the decision.

The appellate court had already allowed the funding restriction to take effect in September while it reviewed the administration’s appeal of Talwani’s ruling.

Planned Parenthood has acknowledged that at least 20 of its health centers have shut down since President Trump signed the legislation into law in July, underscoring the real-world impact of the policy shift away from taxpayer-funded abortion providers.

Talwani has since attempted to block enforcement of the law again in a separate lawsuit brought by 22 Democrat-led states and the District of Columbia. That ruling, however, has been temporarily stayed by the appeals court as it considers whether to fully lift the injunction.

Reacting to Friday’s decision, Planned Parenthood Federation of America President Alexis McGill Johnson accused the administration of undermining access to care.

“This ruling enables the Trump administration’s attempts to block access to care for patients most in need and force Planned Parenthood health centers to the financial brink,” Johnson said in a statement.

At the center of the dispute is a provision of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, passed by a Republican-led Congress, which prohibits Medicaid funding for nonprofit organizations that offer family planning services if they also perform abortions and received more than $800,000 in Medicaid funds during the 2023 fiscal year.

In her July ruling, Talwani concluded that the measure amounted to a “bill of attainder,” a type of legislative punishment explicitly barred by the Constitution.

A bill of attainder is defined as a law that imposes punishment on an individual or group without a judicial trial.

U.S. Circuit Judge Gustavo Gelpi, writing for a three-judge panel appointed by former President Joe Biden, flatly rejected that reasoning.

“The law simply does not impose ‘punishment’ as the term has been historically understood,” Gelpi wrote.

“It instead uses Congress’ taxing and spending power to put appellees to a difficult choice: give up federal Medicaid funds and continue to provide abortion services or continue receiving such funds by abandoning the provision of abortion services,” he added.

The Trump administration argued that Congress acted squarely within its constitutional authority, particularly in the wake of the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision overturning the nationwide right to abortion and returning the issue to the states and the legislative process.

Talwani had also claimed the law infringed on First Amendment rights by limiting the ability of some Planned Parenthood affiliates that do not perform abortions to associate with the broader organization.

The appeals court rejected that argument as well, narrowly interpreting the statute to apply only to affiliates operating under common corporate control with abortion-performing entities—further undercutting claims that the law was punitive or overbroad.