Next post
Yes, you read that correctly. Congress passed a law defunding Planned Parenthood, which was then signed INTO LAW by President Trump. Yesterday, Judge Talwani issued an injunction blocking the administration of that law.
Planned Parenthood won a temporary injunction on Monday that allows its clinics to continue to receive Medicaid funding for services that are unrelated to abortion.
The organization sued the Trump administration earlier on Monday over a new law that essentially bars Planned Parenthood clinics from receiving federal Medicaid payments, claiming that the legislation is an unconstitutional attack on Planned Parenthood’s national organization and its locally run health care clinics.
The lawsuit, which was filed in Federal District Court in Massachusetts, challenges part of the new domestic policy bill that President Trump signed on Friday. Judge Indira Talwani issued the temporary injunction, which expires in 14 days.
Read that again. A federal district judge just told Congress that they should fund Planned Parenthood in perpetuity with the injunction she imposed.
Which is rich given that Planned Parenthood is NOT one of the named agencies in the Constitution that are to receive funds from Congress. Congress, by Constitutional law, has the power of the purse. They can giveth and they can taketh away. Well, Planned Parenthood didn’t like that one bit, hence their lawsuit.
U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani’s ruling marks the first known instance of a federal judge limiting enforcement of any part of the “big, beautiful” bill, which President Trump signed into law Friday.
It came just hours after Planned Parenthood sued over a provision that imposes a one-year ban on state Medicaid payments to health care nonprofits that also offer abortions and received more than $800,000 in federal funding in 2023.
Talwani’s ruling still allows the administration to enforce the provision against other providers, but Planned Parenthood says it comprises almost the entirety of the impacted entities.
The judge issued the decision before the government responded, providing no explanation beyond a brief note that Planned Parenthood had shown “good cause” for her to immediately intervene.
That’s just gobsmackingly arrogant of Judge Talwani. She issued the injunction while claiming that Planned Parenthood had “good cause” yet did not offer the government ANY opportunity to respond. Wow. Just. Wow.
One unelected judge overrules two complete branches of government
— Jim Hanson (@JimHansonDC) July 8, 2025
I guess the Judicial Insurrection isn't over yet
Back to you CJ Roberts
Either SCOTUS fixes this for real or the Executive and Legislative Branches will Check & Balance the Judiciary https://t.co/9OAPOnCh3r
Democrats in Congress, who should know better, are beside themselves with glee.
Defunding Planned Parenthood defunds life-saving care like cancer screenings and abortion.
— Tammy Duckworth (@SenDuckworth) July 8, 2025
Republicans had one of the worst ideas.
A federal judge just blocked it. https://t.co/EnMb2x48vn
Tammy, you are gross. Abortion should never EVER be considered life-saving when a life is ALWAYS taken as a result of the procedure.
Furthermore, Judge Talwani stepped WAY out of her lane in issuing this injunction. And this ruling from June may have some serious play here.
Big blow to Planned Parenthood in what should have been a unanimous decision (3 libs dissented because abortion). Held: Individuals can’t sue over how government spends its money unless Congress explicitly provides for it in law.
— Roger Severino (@RogerSeverino_) June 26, 2025
Several states rightly excluded PP from Medicaid… pic.twitter.com/kVUKagiN2u
This is the rest of Roger’s comment:
Several states rightly excluded PP from Medicaid for not qualifying as a health care provider (two patients enter, only one leaves). PP and individuals sued saying PP is entitled to the money if a Medicaid patient wants to go there. The court answered, effectively, “that’s an interesting question but you don’t get to sue over it.” Liberals are apoplectic that there is anything they can’t sue over, but democracy depends on these limits, otherwise we would not have the rule of law, but the rule of judges.
That’s what we are seeing right now. Judges issuing rulings regardless of what the law and specifically what our Constitution says. Except that, as Roger references, the United States Supreme Court DID rule that states CAN block Planned Parenthood from receiving any Medicaid funding.
Yet here comes Judge Talwani (an Obama appointee) who is claiming that Congress cannot block funding from Planned Parenthood. Which, in my opinion, has her also thumbing her nose directly against the Supreme Court.
Article I, Section 9, Clause 7 of the Constitution gives Congress the power of the purse.
— Office of Congressman Abe Hamadeh (@RepAbeHamadeh) July 7, 2025
This bill has been passed by the Senate.
It has been passed by the House.
It has been signed into law by @POTUS.
This judge has no authority to supersede that. https://t.co/KaCGHWDZ5O
The biggest part of this is that we have THREE branches of government that are supposed to operate in a system of checks and balances. Defunding Planned Parenthood wasn’t done by fiat or executive order. It was a duly enacted law by Congress and signed by the President. There has to be, MUST BE, a valid legal reason for issuing this injunction and trying to order Congress AND the President to unwrite that law.
Judge Talwani did not offer ANY legal reasoning as to why she thought the two-week injunction was necessary. And no, saying Planned Parenthood showed “good cause” is NOT a legal justification by any stretch of the imagination.
Quite frankly, the U.S. Supreme Court needs to step up and start Gibbs slapping these activist judges upside the head with the Constitution. They are reckless and out of control.
I cannot emphasize strongly enough how deliberately reckless Judge Talwani's order is. She is all but begging the executive branch to defy a court order, and do so on the strongest possible legal turf. She must have hoped and intended that this would be the next step.
— Dan McLaughlin (@baseballcrank) July 8, 2025
Her injunction goes completely against all that our Constitution stands for. This crap really needs to stop. And quite honestly, I’d say that Congress and the Trump Administration are well within their purview to ignore her injunction.
Feature Photo Credit: gavel, Constitution via iStock, cropped and modified
draigh says: Warm up the impeachment proceedings. All it will take is one judge being up for impeachment in congress and this whole lawfare stuff will stop!
Cameron says: I truly hope so but I believe that the rest of the judges will double down.
Scott says: Then boot em all..
Seriously, did.Obama or Biden appoint a single judge that has even the slightest clue about the law, or are they all DEI hires that got through school on something other than their merits?
GWB says: Tammy, you are gross. Abortion should never EVER be considered life-saving when a life is ALWAYS taken as a result of the procedure.
That’s not what she said, Nina. She is trying to pull that gimmick of “Medicaid just funds the non-abortion stuff.” Ignoring, of course, that money is fungible.
This judge has no authority to supersede that.
Not entirely true as a blanket statement.
The judge would have the authority to do it IF the spending cut was somehow done in a manner to conflict with, say, laws against discrimination. So, if the funding cut said “We’re not going to allow black women to draw funds from Medicaid” it would pretty blatantly be in defiance of Civil Rights Act and so forth. The other would be IF Congress decided to not fund something/cut funding for something that is explicitly called out in the Constitution, like … judges’ salaries. (Article III, Section 1) But it’s not a right to get money from the government.
She is all but begging the executive branch to defy a court order
That’s the entire point. They want a reason to jump up and down and scream “How dare he!” so they can pitch an impeachment tantrum. They know there are Republicans in the Senate who will vote for it this time (though not “quite as many as there was a while ago”*). And they have to play to the masses and get them all riled up for their coup.
I’d say that Congress and the Trump Administration are well within their purview to ignore her injunction.
More importantly, they’re well within their purview to IMPEACH her. And they should. Not only in defiance of the clear text of the Constitution, but all reasonable legal methodology and procedure. Not fit to be a judge.
GWB says: Forgot the footnote:
(* Bonus quatloos to anyone who recognizes that reference.)
Scott says: Battle of New Orleans by Johnny Horton
Scott says: And dammit, now you’ve got that song stuck in my head!
GWB says: There you go!
And ROFL laughing at having given you the earworm.
SFC D says: Johnny Horton smiles.
Scott says: Pretty sure i ha e that album somewhere…
10 Comments