DOJ, Planned Parenthood Pressed in Abortion Medicaid Lawsuit (1)

A trio of Biden-appointed federal judges Wednesday posed tough questions over whether they should lift a lower court’s blockade on the Trump administration’s plans to withhold Medicaid reimbursements from Planned Parenthood affiliates for providing abortion care.

Argued before a three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, the battle could affect abortion access. It revolves around whether a provision in the Republicans’ 2025 tax and spending law pausing Medicaid reimbursements to centers offering abortion care targets Planned Parenthood affiliates illegally.

Eric McArthur, a US Department of Justice attorney representing the Trump administration, told the judges that “the Supreme Court has repeatedly held” that “Congress may make a value judgment favoring childbirth over abortion and implement that value judgment by the allocation of public funds.”

The arguments come the same day Planned Parenthood released a report stating that since the start of 2025, almost 50 health centers were forced to close due to the loss of Medicaid reimbursements and Title X funds.

Earlier this year, a federal judge in Massachusetts issued preliminary injunctions blocking the US Department of Health and Human Services from applying the provision to exclude Planned Parenthood centers from Medicaid reimbursements, noting the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the claim that the law hurts members that don’t provide abortions.

The HHS in turn appealed, persuading the First Circuit to stay the preliminary injunctions.

Defining Affiliate

Much of Wednesday’s arguments focused on how the Trump administration defined the term “affiliates.”

“What is the government doing in terms of implementing the statute? Because a lot of what we need to figure out today is this meaning of the word ‘affiliates.’ and I think your position is, ‘Well, it depends on how we apply the statute,” Judge Lara E. Montecalvo asked McArthur.

McArthur said his understanding was that the HHS was “working on guidance around the affiliate provision,” but given that it hasn’t been issued, he wasn’t “in a position to tell you what it will say.”

He did note that the “HHS has no intention to define the term affiliate in such a way that it turns on expressive activity"—or actions that violate the First Amendment—"as opposed to corporate control.”

Judge Seth R. Aframe also took issue with ambiguity over the definition, telling McArthur that “most of this case comes down to something you can’t answer, which is, what’s an affiliate.”

Meanwhile, Alan Schoenfeld, a Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr LLP attorney representing the Planned Parenthood affiliates, said “the record is as clear here as it could possibly be that what Congress was intending to do was punish Planned Parenthood.”

“What Congress was trying to do here is to figure out how to punish Planned Parenthood uniquely among abortion providers,” Schoenfeld said.

Judge Gustavo Gelpí was also on the panel.

Planned Parenthood has received funding from Bloomberg Philanthropies, the charitable organization founded by Michael Bloomberg. Bloomberg Law is operated by entities controlled by Michael Bloomberg.

The case is Planned Parenthood Federation of America v. Kennedy, 1st Cir., No. 25-01698, Arguments 11/12/25.