Login

Register | Forgot Your Password? | Close

PHOENIX — A federal judge on Friday dealt a setback to abortion opponents, by prohibiting Arizona from halting public funding that the state indirectly provides Planned Parenthood for general health care services that don't include abortion.

The preliminary injunction by U.S. District Judge Neil Wake bars the state from applying a new state anti-abortion law to Planned Parenthood Arizona and a physician with his own practice.

Arizona already bars public funding for most abortions, but the new law would go beyond that by barring public funding for general health care services provided by abortion clinics and doctors.

The Arizona law was enacted earlier this year but it hasn't been implemented. Similar laws in other states, including Texas and Indiana, also are the subjects of court fights.

Supporters of the law said it is intended to ensure that no public money subsidizes abortion, but Wake said there couldn't be any indirect subsidization because Medicaid reimbursements provided Planned Parenthood Arizona for Medicaid-covered services only pay about half the costs.

As a result, he said, "there is no excess funding that could be used to subsidize abortions."

Wake said it's in the public interest to block implementation because otherwise some 3,000 patients would be denied the opportunity to get care from their chosen health care providers.

Agreeing with positions taken by Planned Parenthood and federal officials, Wake rejected the state's argument that federal law lets states use broad parameters to decide whether health care providers are qualified to deliver Medicaid services, such as whether they provide abortions.

The state's position conflicts with federal protections for Medicaid patients to choose their care providers, Wake said.

"Simply put, a state's determination of whether a provider is qualified to perform Medicaid services must at least be related to Medicaid services," Wake wrote. "The fact that the plaintiff providers perform legally protected abortions does not affect their ability to perform family planning services for Medicaid patients."

In deciding whether to temporarily block the law pending a trial, Wake said the plaintiffs are likely to prevail during a yet-to-come trial on the providers-choice issue.

However, state Solicitor General Dave Cole said that "doesn't necessarily tip the judge's hand on the merits (of the case) because he hasn't heard the evidence" that will be produced during trial.

Cole acknowledged that Friday's ruling was a setback.

Bryan Howard, Planned Parenthood Arizona president and CEO, said the ruling is a victory for poor women whose care won't be disrupted.

"No woman should ever have to fear being cut off from her doctor's care because of shortsighted political games," Howard said.

Wake scheduled a Dec. 6 hearing to schedule future proceedings in the case.

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press.

Associated Press,

share this story:
facebook

7 Comments   |   Join the conversation »
  • Add A Comment 
  • Abuse
    Michoacan wrote...
    Republican Big Government types can never
    cease meddling with a patient's right to choose his own physician. Hypocrites!
  • Abuse
    Vete Ya wrote...
    Puracita Micho
    Abortion is murder, if PP would only provide health services and the free contraception that the Messiah of Socialism has implemented with his ACA, then there is no reason to offer Abortion as a means of birth control. You are the hypocrite, the Judge is a liberal activist and deserves to be removed.
  • Abuse
    Michoacan wrote...
    Some forms of contraception prevent the
    implantation of a viable, fertilized egg, vete. Sounds like you support the murder of the unborn.
  • Abuse
    Steve wrote...
    what a sad little person
    Condoning an organization that murders babies and who's to follow our federal government.
  • Abuse
    Steve wrote...
    geeze micho
    Is there anything immoral that you won't support? You got the abortion thing, homosexuality, open borders, socialism, I'm assuming drug use. Anything else?
  • Abuse
    Constitutionalist wrote...
    Why does it have to be public funding? (1)
    When it comes to abortion, I personally believe it should only be done in two cases, namely rape, or if a competent doctor recommends an abortion because it will endanger the life of the mother. If it is not for one of those two reasons, then I completely agree with the comments that it is immoral, and the equivalent to killing a child. My personal beliefs aside, the thing that bothers me about this issue is that public funding is being used for abortion, and now a judge is trying to prevent us the voters from changing the laws on how our funding is used.
  • Abuse
    Constitutionalist wrote...
    Why does it have to be public funding? (2)
    We will probably not be able to eliminate abortion that is not for the two reasons I just mentioned because of Roe vs. Wade. However, we do not, and cannot be told by one individual, a judge, that we the people cannot change our laws on how to spend our money. This is the nation of "We the people" not "I the judge". The 10th ammendment of our U.S. Constitution, and the 21st article of our State Constitution gives the power to ammend existing laws, and we cannot let one individual tell us that we cannot. We live in a Republic with many democratic principles, not a monarchy or plutocracy.
  • 1

World Class Arizona

  • Go Daddy

    World Class People. World Class Company. Go Daddy is a Fortune 100 "Best Companies to Work For."
  • Avnet

    World Class People. World Class Company. Here's information on a Fortune 500 company from Arizona.

Voice For A Better Arizona