Worthy Christian News > US News > Supreme Court Hands Major Pro-Life Victory to South Carolina in Planned Parenthood Medicaid Case

Supreme Court Hands Major Pro-Life Victory to South Carolina in Planned Parenthood Medicaid Case

by Worthy News Washington D.C. Bureau Staff

(Worthy News) – In a landmark win for the pro-life movement, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Thursday that South Carolina has the constitutional authority to exclude Planned Parenthood from its Medicaid program–marking a significant shift in the battle over taxpayer funding of abortion-related services.

In a 6-3 decision in Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, the Court sided with South Carolina’s right to determine which providers qualify for participation in the state’s Medicaid network. The ruling affirms that federal law does not give individual Medicaid patients or providers the authority to sue a state over disputes tied to provider eligibility under the Medicaid Act’s “free choice of provider” clause.

Justice Neil Gorsuch, writing for the majority, emphasized that the Medicaid statute does not “clearly and unambiguously” establish a private right to sue under Section 1983, a Civil Rights-era provision that Planned Parenthood and a Medicaid client had used to challenge the state’s policy.

“This decision is a resounding affirmation of a state’s sovereign authority to safeguard the integrity of its healthcare programs and ensure public funds are not used to prop up the abortion industry,” said Carol Tobias, president of National Right to Life. “Planned Parenthood’s business is abortion, and today’s ruling allows states to draw a moral and fiscal line in the sand.”

South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson praised the ruling, saying, “The Supreme Court just slammed the door on Planned Parenthood’s latest attempt to force its radical agenda through the courts. South Carolina–not unelected judges–decides how we administer our Medicaid program.”

The case originated in 2018, when Governor Henry McMaster signed an executive order declaring abortion clinics unqualified to receive Medicaid reimbursements for any services. The move was aimed at cutting off indirect taxpayer support for abortion providers. Despite claims that the Medicaid funds were only used for other services like cancer screenings and contraception, state officials argued that funding even those services subsidized and helped sustain the abortion business model.

Planned Parenthood and one of its Medicaid clients sued, claiming a violation of their right to choose a provider. Lower courts agreed with the plaintiffs and blocked the state’s policy — until the Supreme Court reversed those rulings on Thursday.

While the case did not directly address abortion itself, the implications are far-reaching. Planned Parenthood performs an estimated 40% of all abortions in the United States, and Medicaid reimbursements help support its operations. With Thursday’s ruling, other pro-life states such as Missouri, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Texas–who have already removed Planned Parenthood from their Medicaid programs–now have stronger legal backing to defend their decisions.

Pro-life advocates hailed the decision as a crucial step toward separating public healthcare dollars from the abortion industry altogether. “Taxpayers should not be forced to underwrite an organization that ends the lives of unborn children under the guise of ‘healthcare,'” said Jeanne Mancini, president of the March for Life.

Justice Clarence Thomas, concurring separately, hinted that it may be time to reevaluate the overbroad application of Section 1983, which has often been used to expand the reach of federal mandates beyond their original intent. “Today’s ruling respects constitutional boundaries and reinforces the principle that not every policy disagreement should be settled in the courtroom,” Thomas wrote.

In dissent, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, joined by Justices Sotomayor and Kagan, criticized the majority for what she called a “narrow and ahistorical” reading of civil rights law. She warned that the decision could have “tangible harm to real people” who rely on providers like Planned Parenthood for basic services.

But pro-life leaders counter that a patient’s healthcare needs can be met through a vast network of alternative clinics that don’t profit from abortion. In South Carolina alone, over 200 other federally qualified health centers offer reproductive and preventive care without the moral and political baggage of Planned Parenthood.

“This is not about denying care. It’s about making sure care is offered by providers who do not exploit vulnerable women for profit or end innocent human lives,” said Kristan Hawkins, president of Students for Life of America.

As the Supreme Court continues to reshape the legal landscape post-Roe v. Wade, the Medina decision could prove to be another pivotal moment in restoring moral accountability and local control to American healthcare.

The case now returns to the Fourth Circuit Court for further proceedings consistent with the high court’s opinion, but the message from Washington is clear: states have every right to disentangle their healthcare systems from abortion providers–and the pro-life movement is ready to keep pressing forward.

Latest Worthy News