Judge temporarily blocks Planned Parenthood ‘defunding’ in Trump megabill

[Trumpetman]

No they aren't. They are being barred from MediCare/MedicAid reimbursement for ANY services.

WW

If they also offer abortions. Now is that only true for them or true for every provider taking the money?

They aren't required to take the money.

 

[Trumpetman]

Who said anything about the same building?

They are being barred as an organization, no matter what other services are provided or not provided in a building.

WW

Sorry I had argued on another site that they could split their abortion services away and make is a separate organization. Got my threads crossed.

Are the requirements exclusive to Planned Parenthood or are they the same for any provider seeking reimbursement for all those non-abortion services?

 

[Trumpetman]

So you admit you failed here? Well, I made that plain. Off you go then.

It's sad to see where and how you get your personal gratification. But again...the embarrassment is all yours.

You tell yourself whatever you need to get through the day.

 

[JMR]

If they also offer abortions. Now is that only true for them or true for every provider taking the money?

They aren't required to take the money.

Abortions account for less than 3% of the services provided by Planned Parenthood. Trump's mission to defund this program is just red meat for his willing fans.

 

[Lursa]

You tell yourself whatever you need to get through the day.

Off you go...you said you made another thread to head to since this one didnt work out for ya.

 

[rahl]

so judges now decide Congressional spending packages


really? just eliminate the House, Senate and Presidency and let judges rule

So you don’t know what this injunction is actually about. Ok.

 

[rahl]

If they also offer abortions. Now is that only true for them or true for every provider taking the money?

They aren't required to take the money.

The federal government doesn’t get a say in whether they can or can’t provide abortions. Nor can they withhold Medicaid/medicare funding if they do provide abortions.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Sorry I had argued on another site that they could split their abortion services away and make is a separate organization. Got my threads crossed.

Are the requirements exclusive to Planned Parenthood or are they the same for any provider seeking reimbursement for all those non-abortion services?

Except the law says (see post #150):

(b) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Prohibited entity.--The term ``prohibited entity''
means an entity, including its affiliates, subsidiaries,
successors, and clinics--

Meaning that even if PP split off abortion services into a different entity - THAT entity is still blocked from receiving reimbursement for breast cancer screenings, cervical cancer screenings, STD testing, STD treatment, pregnancy testing, prenatual services, etc.

WW

 

[hecatmoggie]

So you don’t know what this injunction is actually about. Ok.

I do

Its pro-abortion people getting liberal judges to thwart Congressional Approved Bills

 

[rahl]

I do

Clearly not.

Its pro-abortion people getting liberal judges to thwart Congressional Approved Bills

Right. You don’t know what it’s about. Thank you for admitting it.

 

[hecatmoggie]

Clearly not.

Right. You don’t know what it’s about. Thank you for admitting it.

you didn't read the article - I did

here, I'll give you some quotes


U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani’s ruling marks the first known instance of a federal judge limiting enforcement of any part of the “big, beautiful” bill, which President Trump signed into law Friday.
Talwani’s ruling still allows the administration to enforce the provision against other providers,
Talwani is an appointee of former President Obama.



pretty clear - a liberal judge is thwarting the Bill Congress voted on and passed and that was signed into law by the President .......

 

[rahl]

you didn't read the article - I did

here, I'll give you some quotes


U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani’s ruling marks the first known instance of a federal judge limiting enforcement of any part of the “big, beautiful” bill, which President Trump signed into law Friday.
Talwani’s ruling still allows the administration to enforce the provision against other providers,
Talwani is an appointee of former President Obama.



pretty clear - a liberal judge is thwarting the Bill Congress voted on and passed and that was signed into law by the President .......

Right. You don’t know why it was stopped. I already pointed that out.

 

[Trumpetman]

Except the law says (see post #150):

(b) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Prohibited entity.--The term ``prohibited entity''
means an entity, including its affiliates, subsidiaries,
successors, and clinics--

Meaning that even if PP split off abortion services into a different entity - THAT entity is still blocked from receiving reimbursement for breast cancer screenings, cervical cancer screenings, STD testing, STD treatment, pregnancy testing, prenatual services, etc.

WW

So they couldn't decide to meet the criteria another way by say... not providing abortions?

 

[Trumpetman]

The federal government doesn’t get a say in whether they can or can’t provide abortions. Nor can they withhold Medicaid/medicare funding if they do provide abortions.

This isn't getting a say on if they provide them. This is getting a say on if they are going to do business with them when they provide them.

Next up district judge declares Federal Government can't impose sanctions on Russia and has to do business with them.

"How dare the government think they can have criteria for doing business and how dare that criteria be determined by laws passed by Congress!"

 

[rahl]

So they couldn't decide to meet the criteria another way by say... not providing abortions?

The federal government doesn’t get a say if they provide abortions or not

 

[rahl]

This isn't getting a say on if they provide them. This is getting a say on if they are going to do business with them when they provide them.

The government doesn’t get a say say in that.

Next up district judge declares Federal Government can't impose sanctions on Russia and has to do business with them.

Non sequitur

"How dare the government think they can have criteria for doing business and how dare that criteria be determined by laws passed by Congress!"

Congress doesn’t get a say in abortion. Nor can they withhold Medicaid/Medicare funds from a Medicare facility that provides the same services every other facility that
Received Medicaid/medicare funds does.

 

[Trumpetman]

The federal government doesn’t get a say if they provide abortions or not

The government gegts a say on if they do business with them or not.

Next up, KKK sues government because they won't send them money and do business with them.

"These assholes say that in order to do business with them, we have to stop being racist and lynching people. That's infringing our free speech and we want them to do business with us anyway."

 

[rahl]

The government gegts a say on if they do business with them or not.

Nope. Not regarding Medicaid/medicare if they provide the same services every other Medicare/medicaid provider does.

Next up, KKK sues government because they won't send them money and do business with them.

Non sequitur

"These assholes say that in order to do business with them, we have to stop being racist and lynching people. That's infringing our free speech and we want them to do business with us anyway."

 

[Trumpetman]

The government doesn’t get a say say in that.

Non sequitur

Congress doesn’t get a say in abortion.

BTW Congress DOES get a say in abortion. The issue with abortion at the federal level is that laws haven't often been passed and it instead has been federalized via the courts.

That is why one of the chief complaints by Democrat voters were that Democrat representatives had decades to codify Roe v Wade.

Likewise MAGA could, if they chose, codify the opposite of that.

Here's a hint, they've only defunded, not made illegal.

They are 100% allowed to defund.

 

[rahl]

BTW Congress DOES get a say in abortion.

No they don’t.

The issue with abortion at the federal level is that laws haven't often been passed and it instead has been federalized via the courts.

Congress gets no say.

That is why one of the chief complaints by Democrat voters were that Democrat representatives had decades to codify Roe v Wade.

They couldn’t.

Likewise MAGA could, if they chose, codify the opposite of that.

No they can’t. The Supreme Court already told you this.

Here's a hint, they've only defunded, not made illegal.

They can’t defund them.

They are 100% allowed to defund.

No they aren’t.

 

[Trumpetman]

Abortions account for less than 3% of the services provided by Planned Parenthood. Trump's mission to defund this program is just red meat for his willing fans.

So to use your reasoning, if forgoing 3% of your business allowed you to keep the government funded 97% would you do it?

I mean if you want that 97% it doesn't seem that hard a choice. You could even use that government money to grow that remaining business even more.

 

[hecatmoggie]

Right. You don’t know why it was stopped. I already pointed that out.

let me guess ... you think it has validity ? LOL

left TDS'ers grasping for straws as they lose day after day after day

its gorgeous

 

[rahl]

let me guess ... you think it has validity ? LOL

Of course it does. Congress can’t discriminate.

left TDS'ers grasping for straws as they lose day after day after day

How many lawsuits has Trump lost again?

its gorgeous

It’s hilarious

 

[Lursa]

BTW Congress DOES get a say in abortion. The issue with abortion at the federal level is that laws haven't often been passed and it instead has been federalized via the courts.

That is why one of the chief complaints by Democrat voters were that Democrat representatives had decades to codify Roe v Wade.

Ha, no. Not even close. Dobbs removed the federal govt from the issue. Dobb's enabled states to allow women/their doctors to have/provide abortions with no due process. And most states do, up to some point, many with the same freedoms as before.

 

[JMR]

So to use your reasoning, if forgoing 3% of your business allowed you to keep the government funded 97% would you do it?

I mean if you want that 97% it doesn't seem that hard a choice. You could even use that government money to grow that remaining business even more.

You show no reasoning, only judgement based on ignorance. A facility that actually delivers women's health care must also be able to provide abortions. This can be clearly seen by the women who have died, and/or had their health seriously compromised by the "new" reproductive laws.
It appears you think it best for Planned Parenthood to cater to the political whims of the current administration, rather than the care of women.