Trump abortion referral 'gag rule' survives demands for emergency halt
Send a link to a friend
[July 12, 2019]
By Jonathan Stempel
(Reuters) - A federal appeals court on
Thursday rejected emergency bids to temporarily set aside its recent
decision allowing the Trump administration to enforce a "gag rule" that
could strip Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers of federal
funding for family planning.
By a 7-4 vote, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals let stand its June
20 decision lifting injunctions blocking enforcement of the rule, which
makes clinics ineligible for Title X family planning funds if they
provide abortion referrals.
An emergency stay had been sought by some abortion rights advocates,
including Planned Parenthood, and by 20 U.S. states and the District of
Columbia.
California, Oregon and Washington, which had won the injunctions in
lower courts, want the appeals court to revisit its decision, and the
court is doing so on an expedited basis.
Leana Wen, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, called
the order "devastating" to people who rely on Title X for healthcare,
and said the rule lets the government "censor our doctors and nurses
from doing their jobs."
All seven judges in Thursday's majority were appointed by Republican
presidents, including two by Donald Trump, while the four dissenters
were appointed by Democratic presidents. All three judges on the
original panel are Republican appointees.
Announced in February, the rule largely restored a rule that had been
created in 1988 and upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1991, only to be
suspended by the Clinton administration in 1993.
The rule was intended to help Trump fulfill his 2016 campaign pledge to
end federal support for Planned Parenthood, which receives an estimated
one-fifth of all Title X funds.
[to top of second column]
|
Planned Parenthood president Dr. Leana Wen speaks at a protest
against anti-abortion legislation at the U.S. Supreme Court in
Washington, U.S., May 21, 2019. REUTERS/James Lawler Duggan/File
Photo
According to the June 20 decision, the rule was a "reasonable
interpretation" of Title X, and supported the government's
"important policy interest" in ensuring that taxpayer dollars not
fund or subsidize abortions.
Critics said enforcing the rule would cause irreparable harm by
keeping clinics from providing critical healthcare, including
non-abortion services, especially to poor people and minorities.
While the 9th Circuit is widely considered among the most liberal
federal appeals courts, Trump has appointed six of its judges and
won Senate confirmation for a seventh. The White House has made
seating conservative federal judges a priority.
The cases in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals include
California v Azar et al, No. 19-15974; Oregon et al v Azar et al,
No. 19-35386; and Washington et al v Azar et al, No. 19-35394.
(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; editing by Susan Thomas
and Dan Grebler)
[© 2019 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
Copyright 2019 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content.
|