Supreme Court allows federal cut in family planning funds for Oklahoma over abortion dispute September 4, 2024By Kate Scanlon OSV News Filed Under: News, Respect Life, Supreme Court, World News WASHINGTON (OSV News) — The U.S. Supreme Court Sept. 3 rejected Oklahoma’s effort to regain millions in federal family planning grants that the Biden administration rescinded over the state’s refusal to comply with its abortion referral requirements. The high court rejected the bid for emergency relief from Oklahoma, in which the state asked the Supreme Court to temporarily block the Department of Health and Human Services from rescinding about $4.5 million in federal Title X funding from the Oklahoma State Department of Health. As is typical in emergency orders, the Supreme Court’s majority did not offer a rationale for their directive. The court said Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch dissented, indicating they would have granted the application. The Biden administration cut the funds for family planning projects in Oklahoma after the state refused to comply with a regulation requiring it to provide patients with a national hotline number for information about pregnancy options and include abortion as among those options. The state sued in response, arguing the government illegally imposed conditions for the funding that are not specified in the family planning program known as Title X, a program that provides reproductive health care and family planning services to people with low or no incomes. The federal government argued against the application for emergency relief, arguing the wider case is still ongoing. Oklahoma and 11 other states sued in response to the regulation, and that case is still pending in the lower courts. The issue could return to the Supreme Court. The move is the latest in a series of narrow actions from the high court on issues related to abortion since it issued its landmark ruling in June 2022 in Dobbs v. Jackson’s Women’s Health Organization, which overturned its previous abortion precedent, including Roe v. Wade. Read More Supreme Court Supreme Court leaves in place mail-order distribution of mifepristone during legal challenge As justices consider birthright citizenship, displaced mom says her US-born child ‘should belong’ Supreme Court hears case on birthright citizenship executive order with Trump in attendance Supreme Court backs challenge to Colorado conversion therapy ban Supreme Court weighs whether policy of turning away asylum-seekers at border can be reinstated Supreme Court to hear arguments in Trump effort to end temporary protections for Haitians Copyright © 2024 OSV News Print
