A divided federal appeals court on Thursday upheld a lower court’s decision blocking the enforcement in Maryland of Trump administration rules that prohibit taxpayer-funded clinics in the Title X program from making abortion referrals.
The Richmond, Virginia-based 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals wrote that the administration’s rules “failed to recognize and address the ethical concerns of literally every major medical organization in the country” and “arbitrarily estimated the cost” of implementing part of the rules.
Earlier this year, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals allowed the administration’s changes to start taking effect and later upheld the rules, which also prohibit clinics in the program from sharing office space with abortion providers.
Pro-life advocates have argued Title X has long been used to indirectly subsidize abortion providers.
Abortion supporters have characterized the referral restrictions as a “gag rule.”
They argued that the physical separation rule would force many clinics to find new locations, undergo expensive remodels or shut down, reducing access to the program that provides birth control and abortion services.
Planned Parenthood and some other abortion providers decided to withdraw from the program rather than comply. Since then, some of the rejected federal funds have been replenished by state or local funds.
Democratic Baltimore Mayor Bernard C. “Jack” Young praised the ruling.
“While we celebrate today’s win for Maryland providers and their patients, our fight endures to restore the integrity of our nation’s family planning program for the millions of people across the US most in need of high-quality family planning care,” Clare Coleman, president and CEO of the National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association, said in a statement.
Neither the Justice Department nor the Department of Health and Human Services immediately responded to requests for comment.
Judge Stephanie Thacker, a nominee of President Barack Obama, wrote the court’s opinion. She was joined by seven other judges.
Judge Julius Richardson, who was nominated by President Donald Trump, wrote a dissenting opinion and was joined by five other judges.
He wrote that the final rule “falls well within HHS’s established statutory authority, and the record shows that it was a product of reasoned decisionmaking.”
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.