A federal judge on Dec. 2 prevented enforcement of a provision in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, the president’s major tax and domestic policy legislation, that would have eliminated Medicaid funding to Planned Parenthood and local partners offering abortions in 22 states.
U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston ruled that Democratic attorneys general who filed a lawsuit against the measure are likely to succeed on the merits by arguing that it creates an unconstitutional condition on states’ Medicaid participation. She deferred the preliminary injunction for seven days to allow time for an appeal.
Talwani described the law as “impermissibly ambiguous” and said that it would essentially “increase the percentage of patients unable to receive birth control and preventive screenings, thereby prompting an increase in states’ health care costs.”
The clause in question from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which Congress passed in July, forbids Medicaid reimbursements to tax-exempt organizations offering family planning and reproductive health services if they perform abortions and received more than $800,000 in Medicaid funds over the course of fiscal year 2023.
Planned Parenthood stated that at least 20 health centers have shuttered since September, when the appeals court allowed the law to move forward.
According to Planned Parenthood’s 2023–2024 annual report, nearly 40 percent of its total revenue comes from government sources, amounting to more than $792 million. The organization performed 402,230 abortions during that fiscal year, according to the report. However, the use of government funds for abortions is prohibited by the Hyde Amendment.
Talwani’s order highlights the claim made by the states that the provision violates due process by changing funding terms in the midst of a program.
The lawsuit followed Talwani’s initial July 28 preliminary injunction in a related case, which temporarily shielded Planned Parenthood from the cuts.
In that case, Talwani partially granted Planned Parenthood’s request for a pause to the law’s implementation, highlighting concerns over sudden losses in their funding, which could disrupt services for non-abortion patients and for low-income individuals and families.
