Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The U.S. supreme court has granted a petition to hear a case out of South Carolina involving abortion provider Planned Parenthood.
On Wednesday (December 18, 2024), the high court issued a one sentence ruling (.pdf) affirming its decision – but noted its review would be limited to the first of two questions raised by the petitioner, former S.C. Department of Health and Human Services (SCDHHS) Robby Kerr.
Specifically, the court will address “whether the Medicaid Act’s any-qualified provider provision unambiguously confers a private right upon a Medicaid beneficiary to choose a specific provider.”
On July 13, 2018, South Carolina governor Henry McMaster issued an executive order (.pdf) instructing the state’s Department of Health and Human Services (SCDHHS) – run by Kerr at the time – to deem abortion clinics “unqualified to provide family planning services” and to “immediately terminate them” from participation in the state’s Medicaid program.
***

***
That decision was blocked by the U.S. fourth circuit court of appeals. In June of 2023, the high court vacated (.pdf) the fourth circuit’s ruling – remanding the case back to the lower court “for further consideration.”
“I remain confident in South Carolina’s authority to administer its Medicaid program and the decision to terminate Planned Parenthood’s funding,” McMaster said at the time. “I am hopeful that the Fourth Circuit will recognize that Congress did not intend to give Medicaid recipients the ability to force States to subsidize abortion providers like Planned Parenthood.”
In March of this year, the fourth circuit ruled (.pdf) Medicaid beneficiaries may “freely choose among qualified healthcare providers, of which Planned Parenthood is one.”
In other words, they have a right to use tax dollars at abortion clinics – even if those clinics are disqualified as Medicaid providers.

***
“This case marks the third time that we have been called upon to resolve the same legal issue: whether the free-choice-of-provider provision of the Medicaid Act creates individual rights enforceable (by federal civil rights statutes),” the fourth circuit judges wrote, seeming to adopt a tone with the high court. “After another round of briefing and oral argument, we respectfully conduct that the answer is again yes.”
“Preserving access to Planned Parenthood and other providers means preserving an affordable choice and quality care for an untold number of mothers and infants in South Carolina,” the fourth circuit ruling continued. “Indeed, we are told that, if Planned Parenthood clinics in South Carolina were to be shuttered, other Medicaid-funded clinics in the state would be more hard-pressed to meet the demand in family planning care.”
Other circuits have disagreed, arguing supreme court rulings in previous cases – and subsequent cases – make it abundantly clear no such enforceable right to pick one’s health care provider within a taxpayer-subsidized network exists.
“Unless Congress ‘speaks with a clear voice,’ and manifests an ‘unambiguous’ intent to confer individual rights, federal funding provisions provide no basis for private enforcement,” the court concluded in the 2002 case Gonzaga v. Doe.
***
RELATED | PRO-LIFE GROUP CHIDES GOP
***
This position was affirmed last June in Health and Hospital Corporation of Marion County v. Talevski (.pdf), which recognized that while legal remedies were available to protect “every right that Congress validly and unambiguously creates” – there is no unlimited, unilateral conveyance.
Talevski was the case cited by supreme court justices in sending this matter back to the fourth circuit for further review – although it appears the lower court was having none of it.
Attorneys for the state want the justices to settle the matter once and for all, arguing there is “no time to wait.”
“Whether a private party can drag a state into federal court for disqualifying a provider should not turn merely on where that state is located,” its petition noted. “Five circuits have wrongly subjected states to private lawsuits congress never intended. And the (fourth circuit) decision shows that courts will continue to err until this court grants review.”
Keep it tuned to FITSNews for the latest updates on this case… as well as the latest on another looming abortion battle at the S.C. State House in 2025.
BANNER VIA: GETTY IMAGES
***
ABOUT THE AUTHOR …

Will Folks is the founding editor of the news outlet you are currently reading. Prior to founding FITSNews, he served as press secretary to the governor of South Carolina. He lives in the Midlands region of the state with his wife and eight children.
***
WANNA SOUND OFF?
Got something you’d like to say in response to one of our articles? Or an issue you’d like to address proactively? We have an open microphone policy! Submit your letter to the editor (or guest column) via email HERE. Got a tip for a story? CLICK HERE. Got a technical question or a glitch to report? CLICK HERE.
3 comments
Had (un)Planned Parenthood remained true to its founder’s vision, they would actually be a “planned parenthood” organization. Instead, seeking to expand the racist, eugenicist founder, Margret Sanger’s, vision, (un)Planned Parenthood began abortion advocacy in the ’40s and ’50 and actually started killing babies in 1970. Since then, (un)Planned Parenthood alone is responsible for more than 9,000,000 abortions (conservatively). they provide more than 30% of all abortions in the US and 2023, despite the appropriate reversal of Roe V Wade, 2023 was a banner year at (un)Planned Parenthood where they performed more than 390,000 abortions – a record more than 5% higher than the previous record.
My tax dollars should never pay for abortions
Exactly Rebecca, I don’t think my tax dollars should go towards services like the fire department either. If you house catches on fire that’s your responsibility not mine. Same goes for the roads, my tax dollars should only go to roads I drive on.