The Supreme Court Draws a Line: No More Public Dollars for Planned Parenthood
AustinLiberator
By David Crockett, Esq. | June 26, 2025
When the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its decision today in Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, it didn’t just settle a circuit split—it reaffirmed a moral and constitutional truth: the government has no obligation to fund every claimed right, and certainly no obligation to fund Planned Parenthood.
That doesn’t mean Americans should be denied access to cancer screenings, STI tests, contraception, or prenatal care. They shouldn’t. But access is not the same as entitlement, and the Founders never intended for taxpayer money to be a piggy bank for controversial causes dressed up as “public health.”
Government Funding Is Not a Blank Check for Private Values
For decades, Planned Parenthood has operated as a politically active, ideologically charged organization—not merely a neutral medical provider, but an engine of cultural reengineering. While it offers some services that are medically uncontroversial, its brand, business model, and political alliances are inseparable from its role as the nation’s leading abortion provider and progressive power broker.
When states like South Carolina say, “We don’t want our Medicaid dollars funding that,” they’re not violating rights—they’re exercising judgment. Judgment is what self-government requires.
And now, thanks to Medina, they can do so without fear of being hauled into federal court by activists demanding state obedience to federal ambiguity.
The Supreme Court rightly held that Medicaid’s “free choice of provider” clause is not a sword citizens can wield to force the state’s hand. It’s a guideline for how states may structure programs—not a private right enforceable through § 1983 lawsuits.
This is federalism at work. It is also constitutional restraint. The Court’s majority, led by Justice Neil Gorsuch, refused to twist a funding statute into a judicial cudgel. Congress can grant enforceable rights if it wants—but the judiciary will not invent them.
Family Planning Is a Freedom—Not a Freebie
Let’s be clear: no woman, no family, should be denied access to contraception or preventative care. But the freedom to seek care does not guarantee that the government will pay for it—or pay for it at the provider of your choosing.
A woman who wants to receive care at Planned Parenthood may do so. What she may not do—any longer—is compel the state to fund it. That’s not cruelty; that’s constitutional discipline.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s dissent laments the Court’s ruling as a blow to “vulnerable populations.” But it was never the role of the judiciary to mandate equal funding outcomes. If Planned Parenthood is truly the indispensable community pillar it claims to be, let it thrive without the government’s teat.
Churches, charities, private foundations, and yes—individual donors—can and should step in where there is need. Let the market and the moral conscience of civil society do what they were meant to do.
A Moral Divide with Budget Consequences
Americans remain deeply divided over Planned Parenthood. Many citizens—millions—view its core business as a moral evil. Should their tax dollars be used to support it under the guise of “family planning”? The answer is no—and today the Court affirmed their right not to be complicit.
Even apart from abortion, the organization’s history is littered with controversy: Margaret Sanger’s eugenic legacy, misallocation of funds, political entanglements, and an unrelenting focus on shaping cultural norms from the top down.
States must retain the power to steer clear of that agenda.
A Call for Real Care
We ought to make family planning and women’s health services available through a diverse network of providers—community clinics, private OB/GYNs, nonprofit cooperatives. And those providers should receive public funding because they provide care, not because they’re aligned with a particular political vision.
Access can be protected without sacrificing principle.
The Path Forward
Today’s ruling is not the end of anything—it is the restoration of boundaries. Let Planned Parenthood continue its operations with private support. Let patients make their choices in freedom. And let the taxpayer no longer be drafted into subsidizing an agenda they abhor.
The Court has drawn the line. We must now walk it—with resolve, with decency, and with respect for both liberty and life.