As SCOTUS hearings begin, local governments warn of devastating public health consequences if Planned Parenthood is disqualified from Medicaid.
OAKLAND, CA (April 2, 2025) – As the U.S. Supreme Court hears oral arguments today in Medina v. Planned Parenthood, Public Rights Project (PRP) and 60-plus local governments and leaders are urging the Court to uphold Medicaid patients’ long-standing right to choose their own qualified health care provider.
PRP filed an amicus brief in the case on behalf of local leaders from across 16 states on March 14, warning of the serious public health consequences at stake. The brief challenges an attempt by South Carolina to remove Planned Parenthood South Atlantic as a Medicaid provider in the state solely because they offer a full spectrum of reproductive health care, including abortion services.
South Carolina, represented by the Alliance for Defending Freedom (ADF), is pushing for a ruling that could set a dangerous precedent, allowing states to block trusted health care providers from serving Medicaid patients. If successful, this effort would threaten access to essential health services for countless individuals across the nation — particularly those in low-income and underserved communities.
“States cannot disqualify Medicaid providers like Planned Parenthood because they disagree with the types of care they provide,” said Jill Habig, founder and CEO of Public Rights Project. “Illegally stripping away the right to choose your provider will have devastating impacts on patients and local health systems. Local government leaders are on the frontlines defending the health of their communities, and we’re proud to support them.”
Medicaid is a critical program for people and families with low incomes to get the health care they need. Reducing the number of available providers would create significant barriers to essential health care, including preventive services, reproductive health care and routine medical care. In fact, Medicaid is the largest public funder of family planning services and supplies and pays for 41% of U.S. births.
According to Planned Parenthood, close to 70% of their health centers are in communities with a shortage of primary care services and unmet health care needs. Nearly half of Planned Parenthood’s patients rely on Medicaid for health coverage. Due to an already severe national provider and funding shortage, city- and county-run clinics that often serve as providers of last resort lack the capacity to absorb an influx of new patients. Communities would see poorer health outcomes and bigger health disparities.
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, which most recently decided this case, ruled that Medicaid patients have the right to choose any qualified provider and can sue in federal court if that right is violated. Congress established this right in 1967 through the “free-choice-of-provider” provision.
PRP’s brief urges the Supreme Court to affirm this decision, ensuring that Medicaid patients retain access to essential care without political interference. If they don’t, countless patients will face longer wait times, fewer providers and, in many cases, no viable health care options at all.
To read the full amicus brief and learn more about Medina v. Planned Parenthood, visit: www.publicrightsproject.org/legal-cases.
###
About Public Rights Project
As a nonpartisan nonprofit organization, Public Rights Project helps local government officials fight for civil rights. We do this by building their capacity to protect and advance civil rights, convening and connecting them on issues of civil rights, and providing legal representation to governments to help them win in court on behalf of their residents. Since our founding, we’ve built a network of over 1,300 partners, including elected officials and 227 government offices across all 50 states, and helped recover over $46 million in relief for marginalized people.
