Judge orders expanded injunction against defunding Planned Parenthood

U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani has issued a new, expanded preliminary injunction ordering the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to continue federal Medicaid funding for all Planned Parenthood facilities nationwide. A provision of the recently passed “Big Beautiful Bill” prohibits organizations that commit abortions under certain provisions from receiving such funds.

“Believing that the law likely violates the Constitution, Talwani has ordered that [HHS] continue to pay Planned Parenthood for medical services as the case proceeds,” reported National Review. “The same judge had previously issued a narrower injunction barring the government from cutting Medicaid payments to only certain Planned Parenthood facilities.”

Key Takeaways:

• A judge’s latest order compels the federal government to fund all Planned Parenthood facilities using Medicaid dollars, expanding upon a previous, more narrow order, in response to a Planned Parenthood lawsuit against the “Big, Beautiful Bill” signed into law on July 4.

• The judge and Planned Parenthood argue that the corporation’s free speech rights are being violated by the law, because its members would have to disassociate with the umbrella organization (which provides its licensing, guidance, and mission) in order to continue receiving federal Medicaid funds.

• The judge, an Obama-appointee in Boston, Massachusetts, claimed in the order that defunding Planned Parenthood “threatens an increase in unintended pregnancies… and an increase in undiagnosed and untreated STIs.”

• The judge also dubiously claimed that abortion only comprises 4% of Planned Parenthood’s services; a similar claim was debunked a decade ago.

• The judge stated that federal Medicaid already is disallowed from reimbursing for most abortions, ignoring the reality of fungibility of funds. Even if dollars do not directly pay for abortions, those dollars still pay for the same staff, doctors, and buildings — contributing to the continued operation of an entity that commits abortions.

• Planned Parenthood has already disqualified itself from receiving federal funding in multiple ways.

• Planned Parenthood had already planned restructuring, layoffs, and a shift to online telehealth — yet it blames the Big, Beautiful Bill’s defunding provision for its woes, though the provision is currently blocked.

The Backstory: 

The 2025 Reconciliation Act removed Medicaid dollars from entities that provide abortion (as of October 1, 2025) and receive more than $800,000 in Medicaid expenditures (during a previous fiscal year). The “Big, Beautiful Bill” was signed into law by President Trump on July 4, 2025 and commenced on July 7, 2025.

The Plaintiffs — Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA), Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts (PPLM), and Planned Parenthood Association of Utah (PPAU) — filed a lawsuit against HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., and immediately thereafter, the Obama-appointed judge issued a temporary restraining order (TRO). The Trump administration issued a response to the judge’s TRO in a memorandum filed on July 14.

On July 21, 2025, Judge Talwani released a 36-page memorandum and order putting in place a preliminary injunction against the defunding of Planned Parenthood.

The Details:

Citing “severe burdens on Planned Parenthood Federation and its Members” and accusing Congress of intending to “punish Planned Parenthood,” Talwani’s latest order, issued on July 28th, expands upon the July 21st order, compelling the government to continue reimbursing all Planned Parenthood facilities with Medicaid dollars while the lawsuit makes its way through the court system.

Is it about free speech?

Talwani and Planned Parenthood have both asserted that the defunding provision penalizes Planned Parenthood for its abortion advocacy and violates its First Amendment rights. However, HHS directly addressed this claim in its memorandum responding to the judge’s original TRO, stating that it isn’t the organization’s speech that’s being prohibited, but the act of committing abortions.

Planned Parenthood’s lawsuit contends that halting its federal Medicaid funding even for “Planned Parenthood Members who do not provide abortion so long as any other Member continues to do so,” infringes on those affiliates’/members’ “expressive” rights which are “protected expression that is ‘outside the contours’ of the Medicaid program.”

In other words, Planned Parenthood’s argument is that taxpayers must keep funding it, or they will be abridging its free speech.

“Members who do not provide abortions cannot escape the law’s burden except by disassociating from Members that do,” the court document claimed, because PPFA…

… licenses the use of the Planned Parenthood name to each Planned Parenthood Member, and the Planned Parenthood name sends a message to the community that the Planned Parenthood Member stands for certain values and provides healthcare and educational services in furtherance of the shared Planned Parenthood mission.

The document added:

• Each Planned Parenthood Member is an independent non-profit organization that is incorporated and governed separately from other Members.

• Planned Parenthood Federation is not itself a healthcare provider and does not participate in Medicaid, but it supports its 47 Members, who do provide healthcare and receive Medicaid funding.

The Associated Press reported:

… Talwani said that the court was ‘not enjoining the federal government from regulating abortion and is not directing the federal government to fund elective abortions or any healthcare service not otherwise eligible for Medicaid coverage.’

Instead, Talwani said that her decision would block the federal government from excluding groups like Planned Parenthood from Medicaid reimbursements when they have demonstrated a substantial likelihood of success in their legal challenge.

In addition to Planned Parenthood, “The Center for Medicaid and CHIP Services (‘CMCS’) has ‘identified at least two non-Planned Parenthood entities’ that have provided for elective abortions and otherwise meet the definition of ‘prohibited entity,’” the order claimed. One of those ‘entities’ is Maine Family Planning, which has filed a separate lawsuit.

Is it about patients?

Nicole Clegg, President and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, told Spectrum News, “We don’t think that this is done in the courts yet, but what it means today is that our patients who are insured by Medicaid have a reprieve. They know that they can continue to get care for us and we know that we can continue to get paid for that care.”

In her order, Talwani also argued:

Patients are likely to suffer adverse health consequences where care is disrupted or unavailable.

In particular, restricting Members’ ability to provide healthcare services threatens an increase in unintended pregnancies and attendant complications because of reduced access to effective contraceptives, and an increase in undiagnosed and untreated STIs.

She made no mention of the 15,000 Federally Qualified Health Centers in the U.S. which outnumber Planned Parenthood facilities by at least 25 t0 1, and which also offer contraceptives, STI treatment, and other non-abortion related services.

The court document even dubiously claimed: “Abortions comprise approximately 4% of Planned Parenthood Members’ services nationwide.” However…

• The corporation’s previous claim of “3%” instead of 4% was handily debunked by the Washington Post fact-checker a decade ago as “misleading.”

• In 2019, Planned Parenthood’s president said the quiet part out loud, admitting that abortion is the corporation’s “core mission.”

The claim appears even more ridiculous given Planned Parenthood’s latest report noting over 400,000 abortions in a single year. It has committed over 7.5M abortions since 2000, while receiving nearly $800M from taxpayers. This is a 100% increase in abortions and a 291% increase in taxpayer funding (nearly $203M v $792M) since 2000.

In addition, Planned Parenthood only serves an estimated 2% of American women of reproductive age, and the organization’s services, clients, and donors have plummeted over the years while abortions soared to record highs.

The Problems:

PPLM reported 9,258 abortions for 2023, and received anywhere from $4.46M to $4.7M from Medicaid reimbursements (about 14.8% of the affiliate’s revenue) with net assets of over $49M.

Funds are fungible

Yet Talwani ignores the reality of financial fungibility, claiming that “no federal funds under the Medicaid program are used to reimburse Planned Parenthood Massachusetts for the cost of providing [abortion] services,” and “The remaining Planned Parenthood Members similarly receive no reimbursement for abortions from Medicaid funds or other federal funds except in permitted circumstances.”

But Medicaid dollars that prop up an entity that commits abortions (even if those dollars only helped to pay expenses like employee salaries, etc.) are still contributing to the continued operation of an entity that commits abortions (which is what ‘fungibility’ means)— and the latest defunding provisions target any entity that is committing certain abortions — not just Planned Parenthood.

In June, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic that states are free to defund Planned Parenthood from their own Medicaid programs. And yet, in some states, state Medicaid dollars can be used to fund abortions, regardless of federal Hyde Amendment prohibitions; several states even allow state Medicaid dollars to pay for abortions for any reason up to birth.

Disqualified and deceptive

Planned Parenthood has already disqualified itself from receiving federal funding in multiple ways while continuing to rake in the cash.

Now, one lone judge is forcing the federal government to continue to direct taxpayer funding to the organization despite the corporation’s deceptive marketing that targets women and young girls, skirting of federal government requirements for funding from multiple agencies, staff accusations of racism and other forms of discrimination, a failure to report sexual abuse, failure to protect patient privacy, and claims of Medicaid fraud and abuse.

The Bottom Line:

The judge’s order argued, “In sum, injunctive relief is necessary to prevent Planned Parenthood Federation and its Members from suffering irreparable injury,” adding:

If Planned Parenthood Members are barred from receiving federal Medicaid reimbursement for their non-abortion services, Planned Parenthood Members across the country anticipate reducing the hours and programs they offer, terminating staff members, and eventually closing health centers.

“The law ‘is already . . . forcing some Members to turn away patients enrolled in Medicaid,'” claimed the judge. “Patients are likely to suffer adverse health consequences where care is disrupted or unavailable.”

But Planned Parenthood’s Instagram claimed otherwise.

Planned Parenthood had previously been planning closures and consolidations with a deliberate move toward telehealth in all of its affiliates for years, and in some instances, its financial deficits provoked recent closures.

It is using the blocked defunding provision to play the victim for its own political gain.

Follow Live Action News on Facebook and Instagram for more pro-life news.