Planned Parenthood V. Texas, Round 1,867: Judge Rules PP Can Stay in the WHP, For Now

Thumbnail image for rick-perry.jpg

I'm sorry to be the one to tell you this, but it's true: the argument between the state of Texas and Planned Parenthood over the Women's Health Program looks like it's never, ever going to end. This case has dragged itself through state courts, federal courts, and back down to the state level again, and neither side is giving an inch. In yet another reversal today, reporters live-tweeting from a hearing in Austin are now reporting that a judge has granted PP a temporary injunction; the nonprofit, once again, can remain in the WHP. For now. However long "now" is, anyway, which in Texas v. Planned Parenthood time is always wildly uncertain.

On October 26, as you probably recall, Governor Rick Perry jubilantly announced Texas would "immediately" defund Planned Parenthood, after the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals refused a request by PP to rehear the case over its ban from the WHP. But Planned Parenthood then promptly filed a lawsuit in Travis County, stating that the ban on "abortion affiliates" keeping them out of the program was invalid under state law. Judge Amy Clark Meachum granted PP a temporary restraining order soon after. Today, Judge Stephen Yelenosky extended to a longer-lasting temporary injunction. The injunction will stand at least until another hearing in mid-December.

Rick Perry wasted no time in reacting to the ruling; in fact, he did so before the judge even issued it.

In a press release issued this morning, Perry claimed the lawsuit is a cynical attempt to buy time. "Venue shopping and courtroom sleight-of-hand in no way helps the women of Texas," he wrote. "We see their stalling tactic for what it is - yet another attempt to unashamedly defy the will of Texas voters and taxpayers."

For now, the WHP is still receiving federal funds. But this whole thing is set to get very sticky on December 31; after months of warning, federal Medicaid officials finally announced today that those federal funds will expire on that date, the Texas Tribune reports.

Perry has insisted that Texas "stands ready" to implement the new, state-funded program, even as his Health and Human Services Executive Commissioner Kyle Janek quietly expressed the hope that the federal government would somehow continue giving the state money for a program that the feds believe violates the law.

That won't be happening. In a letter to Texas health officials, Medicaid head Cindy Mann wrote, once again, that the Obama administration really frowns on kicking Planned Parenthood out of the WHP, saying the move "restricts women's ability to receive services from the qualified family planning providers of their choice."

We're pretty sure that's the idea, Cindy. In preparation for future developments in this saga, may we recommend Bleak House? It's about a lawsuit. One that goes on forever.


My Voice Nation Help
16 comments
RTGolden1
RTGolden1 topcommenter

Anna, can't we come up with a kind of code for this topic?  Your coverage has been stellar, don't get me wrong, but it has become a dreary sort of tennis match.

 

Maybe you could just do posts that read:  "PP: In"  or "PP: Out"  (you could put little v1, v2, v3, etc to keep track)

Daniel
Daniel

The photo depicts Texas Gov. Rick Perry demonstrating, with obvious relish, the mechanics of a transvaginal ultrasound.

oakclifftownie
oakclifftownie

I Think ( yes I do think  with disastrous results sometimes ) but I think TEAM Perry is secretly glad to have Planed Parenthood back in the fold for now so to speak. .

With PP back in the "Game" it will allow the massive New Start up Program to have a few months to have the kinks show up  and less lime light on them while they do little or nothing to correct the problems

Having the program STILL BORN would Raise questions ( by those who would ask questions ) about why they changed things in the first place .

A slow lingering multiple news cycle death of the program  will allow them the " Well we tried exit plan"

 

The end result TEAM Perry still  wants is getting State Texas out of the Funding for woman's health care .

 

 

CitzenKim
CitzenKim

Texas needs to abort R. Perry.  And Abbott, and the rest of the Texas Taliban.

rccrawford
rccrawford

The Texas Government needs to let go of the abortion issue. New information shows that abortion is controlled by scientific laws that make it clear that the pro life movment is wrong about abortion. In fact until the DNA of the genotype expresses the correct phenotype, one cannot tell if the product of conception is human or alive. What this means is that life  at conception is impossible to prove and may not even exist. The laws also show that Texas is simply killing born life in an attempt to save fetuses that may not be alive. http://www.naturalabortionlaws.com http://www.facebook.com/naturalabortionlaw

 

Anna_Merlan
Anna_Merlan

 @RTGolden1 Believe me, dude, I'm tired of the ping-pong too. But, like, what do I do? Just not write about it? That won't work either.

 

Maybe in the future I just write two quick sentences and then open up a thread so we can talk about our favorite sandwich toppings or what styling products we think Rick Perry uses? (There is mousse being utilized, of that I am certain.)  

Anna_Merlan
Anna_Merlan

 @Daniel Man, I wrote so many unfunny captions and deleted them. Should've just asked you guys. 

RTGolden1
RTGolden1 topcommenter

 @CitzenKim Look, I can't stand the Texas Republicans' stance on this and many other issues, but you really really look stupid every single time you try to create the illusory link between American Conservatives and the Taliban.  To make the comparison, you seriously deflate the extreme brutality of the Taliban and make a mockery of what those under Taliban rule had to endure.

ThePosterFormerlyKnownasPaul
ThePosterFormerlyKnownasPaul topcommenter

 @rccrawford Nice try rccrawford ... the matter of when life begins is still a matter of faith and not science.   Ask any obstetrician about when life begins and you will get a response about viability.

 

As far as viability is concerned, 50 years ago a delivery one month ( at 32 weeks) premature was considered iffy at best for the child to survive.  Now a delivery at 24 weeks is considered to have a 50% survival rate.  Some survivors have been born as early as 21 weeks, though this is considered suspect due to the uncertainty in determining the date of conception.

 

As for me I will prefer to be cautious and continue to believe that life begins at conception.

 

As for any law concerning abortion, it must weigh and balance maternal health needs against the potential for life regardless of the stage of the pregnancy.

 

BTW, your so-called laws are at best unproven hypotheses and appear to be more of a set of unsupported opinions.  Nevertheless, you are more than welcome to express them.

 

MisterMean
MisterMean

@ThePosterFormerlyKnownasPaul@rccrawford

What about before conception?   The sperm is defiantly alive.  So is the ovum.   If not used they will die naturally (and if you are religious believer a potential soul is lost!?!?!??)  According to this logic every time a male whacks off he is committing genocide as well as every egg that is not fertilized and is lost due to menstruation.   Imagine if one follows this flawed logic of reducing women to the likes of a queen termite.   No - a fertilized cell is not a life until it is more developed.   That moment is not known by science nor can be determined by religious beliefs.

 

What we have here is an attempt by those who are insecure in their religious beliefs to attempt to strengthen and validate them by forcing them on others who may not believe in them.   In my views they are just messed up sexually.

TheJeremyAdams
TheJeremyAdams

 @ThePosterFormerlyKnownasPaul  @rccrawford All new life does begin with old DNA.  This means that the sexually mature male and female, who engaged in an act resulting in conception, have been walking around with the DNA (half from the male and half from the female) that will be the combined DNA of the product of conception for some number of years (at minimum more than a decade).  It is not posable to tell at conception if the live will survive through birth.  Why would there be miscarriages if one could tell if the zygote, blastocyst, or even a very young fetus would survive?  Would a potential mother not put herself through the trauma of a miscarriage if this could be known?  Most conceptions end in abortion.  According the the New England Journal of Medicine (June 10 1999) at least 25% of detectable pregnancies do end in miscarriage.  This figure does not count the zygotes that do not implant and there for would not indicate on a pregnancy test.  

 

BTW, the first three of those "so-called" laws are based upon current scientific knowledge not unproven hypotheses or unsupported opinions.  The forth is not true as there are approximately 13 births per 1000 people and 8 deaths per 1000 people.  The last two are opinion but so is almost the entirety of the Right to Life argument. 

ThePosterFormerlyKnownasPaul
ThePosterFormerlyKnownasPaul topcommenter

 @MisterMean  @rccrawford Ummm ... no ... the ovum and the sperm each contain only half of the DNA of a human ... after ovulation the ovum is viable for only a few days and in the testes, sperm are constantly being produced and reabsorbed.

 

To the best of my knowledge, we have no scientific proof of when human life begins.  As a result, when life begins is currently a matter of faith rather science.  At best science currently can only talk about the viability of life.

 

It is similar to the argument about evolution.  Darwin's theory talks only about how life came to be as it currently exists, not how it started.

 

Your argument about male masturbation being genocide is based in the prior misbelief about how the man "carries the seed of life" and the woman is merely the fertile field which allows the "seed of life" to grow.

ThePosterFormerlyKnownasPaul
ThePosterFormerlyKnownasPaul topcommenter

 @TheJeremyAdams  @rccrawford 

There is more than one way to get hit by a beer truck.

 

For me the rate of natural miscarriage is evidence of the obstacles that exist for new life and just how special life is ... regardless of the species ...

 

Why throw up additional road blocks to life?

 

The argument using normally occurring miscarriages to support elective abortion is a specious argument at best.  You might as well say that the ovens at Dachau and Auschwitz-Birkenau were justified as those people were going to die anyway.

 

I have a neighbor who went through three miscarriages attempting to have a child of her own.  I know for a fact that each miscarriage took a terrible psychological and physical toll on her.  The fact that she attempted the third pregnancy is testament to the overwhelming force among us for the creation of a new life.

Now Trending

From the Vault

 

General

Loading...