{"id":219025,"date":"2020-02-24T18:12:25","date_gmt":"2020-02-25T00:12:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=219025"},"modified":"2021-03-16T13:11:26","modified_gmt":"2021-03-16T18:11:26","slug":"ninth-circuit-upholds-trump-protect-life-rule","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/ninth-circuit-upholds-trump-protect-life-rule\/","title":{"rendered":"Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upholds Trump administration’s Protect Life Rule"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

UPDATE 3\/16\/21:<\/strong> The Biden Administration has requested<\/a> the Supreme Court to dismiss the lawsuits involving the Trump Administration’s Title X Protect Life Rule which blocked federal dollars from funding health clinics that commit abortions or refer for abortions through the nation’s family planning program. The Fourth U.S. Court of Appeals upheld a federal judge’s decision to block the rule from going into effect, but the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals had upheld the rule. The Supreme Court would have had to determine which appeals court was correct, however, now that Joe Biden is president and has asked the Department of Health and Human Services to review and possibly reverse the Protect Life Rule, the lawsuits are no longer considered necessary by the Biden Administration.<\/p>\n

2\/24\/20<\/strong>: In a 7-4 decision<\/a>, an en banc panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has lifted injunctions that blocked the Trump Administration’s Title X rule change<\/a>. Dubbed The Protect Life Rule, it requires that abortion businesses separate their abortion services from their family planning\/birth control services both physically and fiscally in order to qualify for Title X family planning federal funding.\u00a0Courthouse News reports<\/a>:<\/p>\n

In a 7-4 split, the Ninth Circuit rejected<\/a> arguments that the rule forces doctors to violate medical ethics by withholding information from patients or that it violates other federal laws that require doctors inform patients of all medical treatment options.<\/em><\/p>\n

Last June, a three-judge randomly selected panel from the Ninth Circuit also decided unanimously<\/a> that the rule could go into effect, but the Court then decided, at the behest of pro-abortion groups, that the entire panel of 11 judges would rehear the case. Today, the decision<\/a> agreeing with the original three-judge panel was released.<\/p>\n

According to Courthouse News, the Court found that a previous Supreme Court decision aided the majority’s decision:<\/p>\n

Writing for the majority, U.S. Circuit Judge Sandra Ikuta, a George W. Bush appointee, found that the rule is a \u201creasonable interpretation\u201d of Section 1008 of Title X, which forbids using Title X funds \u201cin programs where abortion is a method of family planning.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

Ikuta and the majority found the rule consistent with the 1991 Supreme Court decision Rust v. Sullivan, which upheld a similar Reagan administration rule that forbade Title X-funded providers from advocating abortion.<\/em><\/p>\n

\u201cThe Supreme Court has long made a distinction between regulations that impose burdens on health care providers and their clients and those that merely reflect Congress\u2019s choice not to subsidize certain activities,\u201d Ikuta wrote.<\/em><\/p>\n

READ:\u00a0Trump\u2019s new \u2018Protect Life\u2019 Rule is a win for women and a loss for Planned Parenthood<\/a><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

In the minority’s dissent,\u00a0U.S. Circuit Judge Richard Paez, a Clinton appointee, claimed, \u201cIn vacating the district courts\u2019 preliminary injunctions, the majority sanctions the agency\u2019s gross overreach and puts its own policy preferences before the law. Women and their families will suffer for it.\u201d<\/p>\n

According to Fox News<\/a>, Department of Justice spokesperson Mollie Timmons praised the decision, stating,\u00a0“We are pleased by the en banc Ninth Circuit\u2019s decision upholding HHS\u2019s rule forbidding the use of taxpayer money to subsidize abortion through Title X grants. Congress has long prohibited the use of Title X funds in programs where abortion is a method of family planning and HHS\u2019s recent rule makes that longstanding prohibition a reality. We look forward to continuing to defend this vital rule against all challenges.”<\/p>\n

However, pro-abortion advocates reacted in the opposite manner, referring to the Protect Life Rule as the “gag rule” in usual fashion:<\/p>\n

\n
\n

The 9th Circuit put politics before patients' lives today, allowing the #TitleX<\/a> gag rule to be enforced. This harmful decision will impact the ability of poor & underserved patients to access quality reproductive care. #SaveTitleX<\/a> & ensure reproductive freedom is for every body.<\/p>\n

— NARAL (@NARAL) February 24, 2020<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n