Earlier this month, Boston Federal Judge Indira Talwani put in place a temporary restraining order to a section of the Big Beautiful Bill that would effectively withhold Medicaid money from Planned Parenthood. This was in place for two weeks at which point Judge Talwani issued a new decision last Monday which was seen as more of a mixed bag.
Judge Indira Talwani, of the Federal District Court in Massachusetts, said that in all, 10 affiliates were covered under her injunction, including Planned Parenthood Association of Utah, Planned Parenthood of Delaware, Planned Parenthood Greater Texas, Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast, and Planned Parenthood of Tennessee and North Mississippi.
That ruling was a mixed bag because Planned Parenthood has 47 affiliates nationwide and only 10 were shielded by her decision from having their Medicaid funds cut off. That meant the other 37 were about to be defunded. Even though its scope was limited, the decision took a lot of flak from the right. Here’s Carrie Severino writing at National Review:
Judge Indira Talwani has delivered what may be one of the most questionable judicial decisions in recent memory—and that’s saying something given the current judicial climate. Her handling of the Planned Parenthood funding case is a textbook case of judicial overreach…
Let’s start with the obvious: Planned Parenthood has no constitutional right to taxpayer funding. None. Yet Talwani attempted an elaborate workaround, invoking the “unconstitutional conditions doctrine” to argue that funding restrictions violated Planned Parenthood’s freedom of association.
This argument falls apart under scrutiny. Talwani cited no precedent supporting her theory that similar funding conditions violate associational rights. That’s because there isn’t any. The funding restriction has nothing to do with Planned Parenthood organizations’ “expressive association” with each other—it’s about the services they provide…
Judge Talwani’s ever-lengthening attempts to defend her judgment are a clear example of judicial overreach—complete with legal theories untethered from precedent and constitutional analysis that reads more like wishful thinking than rigorous jurisprudence. The Trump administration should have little trouble appealing this order, whether in the First Circuit or at the Supreme Court.
Jump forward a week to today and Judge Talwani has issued yet another order restraining the government from cutting funds to all of Planned Parenthood’s affiliates.
A federal judge on Monday indefinitely blocked the Trump administration from enforcing a policy that would prevent many Planned Parenthood clinics from receiving federal Medicaid reimbursements if they continue to offer abortion services.
The order, issued by Judge Indira Talwani in Federal District Court in Massachusetts, extended a temporary block she had placed on the government earlier this month. She found that the policy retaliated against Planned Parenthood in violation of its First Amendment rights and could amount to an unconstitutional “legislative punishment.”…
She noted the expansive role that Planned Parenthood’s umbrella organization plays in political organizing, saying that the provision could also threaten “expressive” activity including advocating before Congress, supporting candidates and communicating with voters.
I’m not an attorney but it sounds like she’s saying Planned Parenthood’s affiliates are involved in politics therefore they have a First Amendment right to continue getting government money so their political organizing isn’t diminished. That sounds like a stretch. As Severino noted above, the affiliates can continue meeting and issuing pro-abortion press releases. That doesn’t mean they have a right to federal funds. Today, Severino added that the new decision jumps the shark by adding a new argument.
Talk about jumping the shark…
Now Judge Talwani expands the grounds of her preliminary injunction to include bill of attainder, which is a real dog of an argument. https://t.co/lwktR3iAQM pic.twitter.com/Emh4LB6Zax
— Carrie Severino (@JCNSeverino) July 28, 2025
Derek Muller, a Notre Dame law professor, says the new element of the decision will get reversed on appeal.
The federal court in the Planned Parenthood case will join the universe of terrible interpretations of the Bill of Attainder Clause ultimately reversed on appeal (e.g., same sex marriage law, funding ACORN, conditioning student aid on registering for the draft). pic.twitter.com/Pr3KQT7CHQ
— Derek T. Muller (@derektmuller) July 28, 2025
In the meantime, we’re back to this situation where a single federal judge has effectively vetoed the majority of congress and the president. We’ll have to wait and see how long this stands.
Bill to defund Planned Parenthood:
✅House: 220 members pass the bill
✅Senate: 50 Senators pass the bill
✅President Trump: Signs the bill
❌Judge Talwani: “Overruled” pic.twitter.com/GS85WEYSkX— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) July 28, 2025
Read the full article here
