The Supreme Court didn’t make a scene this week, but it did make a solid statement.
Supreme Court allows states to cut off Medicaid money to Planned Parenthood https://t.co/FPwyx1j0Wz
— KSNV News 3 Las Vegas (@News3LV) June 26, 2025
In Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, the justices ruled 6-3 that people on Medicaid can’t sue their state just because they don’t like which doctors or clinics are covered.
This means states like South Carolina can choose not to include Planned Parenthood in their Medicaid programs, and avoid being taken to court for it.
The case wasn’t about stopping medical care or closing clinics. It was about who gets to decide how Medicaid is run: the states or the federal courts.
Medicaid Is a Deal Between Governments
Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote the main opinion. He explained that Medicaid is a partnership between the federal government and each state.
It’s not a personal contract with every patient.
There’s a line in the law saying patients can choose “any qualified provider,” but the Court said that doesn’t give people the right to sue the state if they don’t like the provider list.
Only Congress can create that kind of right, and it didn’t do that here.
So, if a state breaks Medicaid rules, it’s up to the federal government (specifically, the Department of Health and Human Services) to step in, not individual patients or advocacy groups.
States Can Decide What Fits Their Values
This decision gives states more freedom to manage their Medicaid programs.
For example, South Carolina decided in 2018 not to include Planned Parenthood as a Medicaid provider. That matched the values of many people in the state.
Now, thanks to this ruling, the state doesn’t have to worry about getting sued for making that choice.
Respecting Moral Beliefs
Medicaid doesn’t cover abortions because of the Hyde Amendment.
Still, many taxpayers don’t want any of their money going to clinics that also provide abortions, even if it’s for other services.
This ruling lets states consider those concerns when deciding who gets Medicaid funding.
The Courts Are Not the Legislature
Another important part of this ruling: it keeps judges in their proper role.
In recent years, advocacy groups have used lawsuits to try to change state policies. If they couldn’t win through lawmakers, they went to court.
The Supreme Court said that’s not how this should work, at least not with Medicaid provider rules.
If someone wants to change the policy, they need to go through the legislature or federal health officials.
What It All Means
This case wasn’t flashy, but it was important. The Court reminded us that states have the right to make decisions about how they run programs like Medicaid.
If voters want something different, they can speak through the election process, not the courtroom.
That’s how democracy works. That’s how the Constitution is supposed to work, too.
In the end, the Court didn’t change any laws. It just made clear who gets to make them – and reminded everyone that not every disagreement belongs in front of a judge.
This article was written with the assistance of AI. Please verify information and consult additional sources as needed.
