The 9th Circuit Rules in Trump's Favor Regarding Abortion and Title X Funding - Granite Grok

The 9th Circuit Rules in Trump’s Favor Regarding Abortion and Title X Funding

Gavel Court Judge

When the Trump administration looked at family planning and Title X funding, it came to a conclusion. The government had wandered away from the intent of the law, and it was time to pull that bureaucracy back. Abortion was not intended to be funded as “family planning.”

Related: Trump Tackles Title X – Federal Dollars Illegally Funding Abortions

We posted the text directly from the law when the president announced that they intended to enforce it as written, not as reimagined.

1008 – The Prohibition of Abortion
None of the funds appropriated under this title shall be used in programs where abortion is a method of family planning.

It seems clear enough. But as with all things involving abortion, the left snapped, and courts were summoned to order, and injunctions on the new (old) rule were implemented. We’ll have none of that plain language business around here, said District courts in Oregon, Washington, and California. And that is where things stood. Everyone expected to see this creep to the steps of the US Supreme Court someday.  Until,

… the Ninth Circuit — which now has a critical mass of strict constructionist, rather than activist, judges — held that there was nothing untoward in reinstating guidelines that the Supreme Court had long ago concluded were consistent with both the law as written and the Constitution.  The Ninth Circuit, therefore, reversed the preliminary injunctions and remanded the cases for proceedings consistent with the appellate court’s findings

Yes, I know the 9th circus is not known for reading plain language, but times they are a-changing. Mr. Trump has effectively if not completely, flipped it.

We hold that the Final Rule is a reasonable interpretation of § 1008, it does not conflict with the 1996 appropriations rider or other aspects of Title X, and its implementation of the limits on what Title X funds can support does not implicate the restrictions found in § 1554 of the ACA. Moreover, the Final Rule is not arbitrary and capricious because HHS properly examined the relevant considerations and gave reasonable explanations. See Elec. Power Supply Ass’n, 136 S. Ct. at 782. Plaintiffs will not prevail on the merits of their legal claims, so they are not entitled to the “extraordinary remedy” of a preliminary injunction. (State of California, p. 81.)

This report notes that Planned Parenthood gave up 60 million in Title X money rather than comply with the enforcement of this plainly written law. Sixty million buys a lot of actual family planning (or is it ‘women’s health care’) if that’s why you are in business. The truth is that Planned Parenthood is in the abortion business.

A business they Plan to improve by spending tens of millions to elect Democrats who might work to get them the 60 million back and then some, which tells you (or reminds you of) another truth. PP never needed your money, but they want it, and Democrats still want them to have it.

As if we don’t have a better use for 60 million dollars, like, say, leaving it in the hands of the people who earned it. They can, after all, choose to donate their portion to Planned Parenthood if it is that important to them.

| American Thinker