A pro-abortion activist judge recently revised her own ruling and ordered the federal government to continue sending Medicaid payments to Planned Parenthood and other organizations that kill innocent preborn babies.
Massachusetts District Judge Indira Talwani issued a revised injunction on Monday against the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
A week prior, she had issued a partial block on the law, only allowing Planned Parenthood facilities and other entities that did not commit abortions to continue to receive Medicaid dollars. A revised order yesterday now requires HHS to fund all Planned Parenthood vendors.
The injunction stops a budget bill passed by Congress and signed by President Trump at the beginning of July, which generally prohibits federal Medicaid dollars from going to organizations that kill preborn babies in the womb for one year. While it has been described as a defunding of Planned Parenthood, it affects other alleged “healthcare” organizations that commit abortions (yet curiously this latest ruling relies on the assertion the bill illegally targets Planned Parenthood).
Much like her last ruling, Talwani’s decision reads like a Planned Parenthood news release, repeating the debunked claim that only four percent of what the organization does is kill babies.
“Patients are likely to suffer adverse health consequences where care is disrupted or unavailable,” Judge Talwani, an Obama appointee, wrote yesterday. “In particular, restricting Members’ ability to provide healthcare services threatens an increase in unintended pregnancies and attendant complications because of reduced access to effective contraceptives, and an increase in undiagnosed and untreated STIs.”
However, most of Planned Parenthood’s revenue comes from abortions, many forms of contraception act as abortifacients and cause serious harm to women, and the only ethical and truly effective way to prevent an STI is chastity. Planned Parenthood actually increases the risk of sexual diseases due to its heavy promotion and normalization of promiscuity, including to children.
An HHS spokesman told the Associated Press the ruling “undermines state flexibility and disregards longstanding concerns about accountability.”
“States should not be forced to fund organizations that have chosen political advocacy over patient care,” Andrew Nixon said.
‘Judicial impeachments must begin’
The ruling drew criticism from pro-life leaders and commentators who suggested Talwani was undermining the rule of law and the separation of powers.
“This is how the Left usurps the will of the American People time and time again,” Students for Life of America President Kristan Hawkins wrote on X. “Judicial impeachments must begin.”
RedState commentator Bonchie said the decision is “the most baseless, insane ruling I’ve ever seen.”
“Understand that by Judge Talwani’s logic regarding her Planned Parenthood ruling, Democrats could pass a bill giving taxpayer funding to the DNC, and if Republicans retake power and defund it, it’d be a violation of the First Amendment,” the commentator also wrote. “Just insane.”
Legal commentators had previously raised concerns about Talwani’s judicial decision-making in this case, which includes a quick temporary restraining order and, more recently, the claim that Planned Parenthood’s First Amendment rights were being threatened.
Carrie Severino, president of the Judicial Crisis Network, concluded Talwani’s various legal analyses are weak and fail to present coherent arguments. “Judge Talwani’s ever-lengthening attempts to defend her judgment are a clear example of judicial overreach—complete with legal theories untethered from precedent and constitutional analysis that reads more like wishful thinking than rigorous jurisprudence,” Severino wrote last week for National Review.
“Her handling of the Planned Parenthood funding case is a textbook case of judicial overreach,” Severino, a former clerk for Justice Clarence Thomas, also wrote.
South Texas College of Law Professor Josh Blackman previously questioned the speed at which Judge Talwani issued the temporary restraining order. “Lower court judges are misbehaving,” Blackman, a legal expert, wrote in his commentary.
He said Talwani “rushed” to file her restraining order and did not include a proper analysis required to issue such injunctions.
Blackman also highlighted a previous quote from Talwani in 2023 where she said she could not process filings in a day.
Political commentator Jarret Stepman also criticized the ruling. “It appears that left-wing judges are just going to dispense with the formalities and make grand declarations for the country based on their ideology and nothing else,” the Daily Signal writer stated.
He noted Talwani has a loose grasp of the law – she previously said a 12-year-old student could not wear a “There are only two genders” shirt to school “because it interfered with the rights of other students,” according to Stepman.
Stepman predicted HHS would eventually win the lawsuit.
“Obviously, Talwani’s decision can’t stand and will likely soon be overturned,” he wrote.
“This does, however, demonstrate how left-wing activist judges have completely abandoned the notion that they are upholding the law. Instead, they’ve decided that they are the law.”
This article was originally published on Lifesite News.
