Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser speaks during an interview with The Associated Press, Thursday, Nov. 21, 2024, in Philadelphia. (AP Photo/Matt Slocum)

This story was first published at Colorado Newsline.

DENVER | Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser joined a lawsuit this week challenging a “defunding” provision congressional Republicans passed in their recent massive tax and spending law, which the lawsuit says directly targets Planned Parenthood. 

The challenged provision blocks Medicaid funding from going to any sexual and reproductive health clinics that provide abortions and received more than $800,000 in federal and state Medicaid funding in fiscal year 2023. 

The provision, which Planned Parenthood said directly targets their services, could affect Medicaid reimbursements for standard reproductive health care including cancer screenings, birth control, and testing for sexually transmitted infections. Planned Parenthood clinics rely heavily on Medicaid funding to offer those services at little to no cost, and Weiser’s office said the provision would threaten at least 200 clinics across the country. 

More than 1.1 million people could lose access to care if Planned Parenthood clinics close. A May study from the Guttmacher Institute, a research and policy organization focused on sexual and reproductive health, found that other clinics for low-income patients would not have the capacity to absorb patients that get care from Planned Parenthood.  

The lawsuit, filed with 22 other Democratic-led states, argues the “defund” provision is ambiguous and violates Congress’ spending clause power. The states seek a court order prohibiting enforcement of the provision in their states, as they argue it will harm their states’ public health and economy. 

“Congress specifically included the Defund Provision in the massive spending bill to target and punish Planned Parenthood for providing abortion access and advocating for reproductive health options for patients,” Weiser said in a statement. “Coloradans continually have made it clear that they support reproductive health care and we are suing the administration to stop it from implementing the provision and leaving states with higher costs for care in the long-term.” 

On Monday, a federal judge granted an injunction in a lawsuit the Planned Parenthood Federation of America filed challenging the same provision of the Trump administration’s signature policy law days after the president signed it. The judge said the law unfairly targets Planned Parenthood without a trial and violates free speech constitutional rights by preventing the organization from advocating for reproductive health care.

Weiser spokesperson Lawrence Pacheco said in a statement to Newsline that the lawsuit “asserts claims and harms specific to the states” under the provision of the Republican policy law barring Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood. He said the provision does not provide clear notice of the states’ obligations. 

“Moreover, the harms to the people of Colorado are significant where many Coloradans rely on Planned Parenthood for healthcare,” Pacheco said. “Filing a separate action ensures that the states may advocate to prevent these harms.”

Since Trump took office in January, Weiser has joined more than 30 lawsuits challenging actions from the administration. He has seen favorable rulings, preliminary or permanent, in the majority of those cases.

Join the Conversation

1 Comment

  1. Trump, in particular, and the complicit GOP are cutting a wide swath of funding of programs that assist the working poor, the poor who can’t work, and elderly people. The cynical justification is to put in place a work requirement. Who knows how that will be implemented in light of the cruel immigration roundup without due process, also at the behest of Trump and his GOP. Well, as a person who was healthy and productive for most of my existence, I can assure you that you never know when poor health will engulf your life. I had a stroke at 47. It took months to recover and years to become almost as productive as I once was. Even so, I retired at 66 with the desire to go on, but not the ability. I was in a good position with a postgraduate degree to make it into a comfortable retirement, but I’m acutely aware of poor workers who are not. Moreover, I’m aware that some who depend upon these programs are not necessarily healthy enough to work to become eligible. I wonder who will speak for them and what crack they will fall into! Why has our society become so cruel and self-centered that we would elect such a narcissist and his henchmen?

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *