📰 Supreme Court Rules States Can Cut Medicaid Funds to Planned Parenthood: What It Means for Patients

In a major decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that states like South Carolina can stop Medicaid funding to Planned Parenthood, even for non-abortion services such as birth control and cancer screenings. This ruling has significant implications for low-income patients who rely on Medicaid to access reproductive health care through organizations like Planned Parenthood.

⚖️ A Divided Court Ruling

The decision came in a 6-3 ruling, with conservative justices in the majority and all three liberal justices dissenting. The case, titled Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, overturned a lower court ruling that had allowed Planned Parenthood and a patient, Julie Edwards, to challenge South Carolina’s decision to cut off Medicaid funding to the organization.

Justice Neil Gorsuch, writing for the majority, said the Medicaid Act does not give individual patients the right to sue the state to keep their provider. He emphasized that such decisions should be made by elected officials, not judges.

“New rights for some mean new duties for others,” Gorsuch wrote. “These choices are best left to Congress, not the courts.”

🚫 What Triggered the Case?

Back in 2018, South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster, a Republican, ordered all state agencies to stop funding any medical provider affiliated with abortion services. This included Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, even though Medicaid law already prohibits the use of public funds for abortions in most cases.

For years, South Carolina had reimbursed Planned Parenthood for non-abortion health services. But with McMaster’s order, thousands of Medicaid patients lost access to vital care such as gynecological exams, birth control, and STD testing.

Gov. McMaster praised the ruling, calling it a victory for state rights and pro-life values.

“We are finally victorious in defending South Carolina’s authority and the sanctity of life,” he said in a statement.

👩‍⚕️ What About the Patients?

At the heart of the case was Julie Edwards, a patient at the Columbia, SC, Planned Parenthood clinic. She said she lost access to her trusted healthcare provider after the funding was pulled. Her lawyers argued that the Medicaid Act gives patients the right to choose any qualified and willing provider.

But now, the Supreme Court says that's not enough to sue.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, strongly disagreed. In her dissent, Jackson warned of the real-world impact on patients.

“This will strip thousands of Americans of the right to choose who treats them when they’re most vulnerable,” Jackson wrote. “This is about dignity, freedom, and healthcare access.”

🔍 What Does the Law Actually Say?

The key legal issue centered on a sentence in the federal Medicaid Act that says patients must be able to get care from any “qualified and willing provider.” While that sounds like a guarantee, the court decided it does not give individuals the legal right to sue if a state violates it.

Lower courts had interpreted that line differently. In fact, a district court and the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals both ruled that South Carolina had unlawfully removed Planned Parenthood from the Medicaid program.

Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III (a Reagan nominee) wrote:

“Congress clearly intended to give low-income individuals a say in choosing their healthcare providers. We shouldn’t take that away.”

But that interpretation has now been reversed by the highest court.

⚔️ Political Battle Over Healthcare Access

The ruling comes at a time when Planned Parenthood is facing increasing pressure from Republican lawmakers and the Trump-era policies that still influence federal health programs. The Trump administration previously moved to withhold Title X funds from Planned Parenthood affiliates across 20 states.

On Capitol Hill, reactions split sharply along party lines:

• Republicans praised the decision.

  “Americans should not have to pay for abortionists disguised as healthcare providers,” said Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah).

• Democrats strongly opposed it.

  “This ruling threatens healthcare for people with no other options,” said Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Illinois).

🧠 Why This Matters

This case isn’t just about abortion — it’s about access to basic healthcare for low-income Americans, especially women. The decision means states now have more power to exclude providers like Planned Parenthood, even if they’re offering services unrelated to abortion.

And while federal law already limits Medicaid funding for abortions, this new ruling allows states to go further — cutting off all funding, even for birth control, STI tests, Pap smears, and more.

🌍 What’s Next?

Legal experts say the ruling may encourage more conservative states to block Medicaid funds to Planned Parenthood. Meanwhile, pro-choice groups and health advocates warn that this will hurt patients who already struggle to find affordable care.

Planned Parenthood’s national president, Alexis McGill Johnson, said:

“This ruling sides with politicians who think they know better than patients. The consequences are not theoretical — they’re already being felt in South Carolina and will soon be felt in other states.”