Judge blocks NC Planned Parenthood cut
CBS/AP
RALEIGH, N.C. - North Carolina cannot withhold funding from Planned Parenthood until a lawsuit over that provision of the state budget has been resolved, a federal judge ruled late Friday.
The ruling by Judge James Beaty Jr. gives at least a temporary reprieve to Planned Parenthood of Central North Carolina while they seek to invalidate the portion of the state budget that would withhold funding for non-abortion services. The group, one of two Planned Parenthood affiliates in the state, said the injunction should allow them to keep operating until the lawsuit over the provision known as Section 10.19 is resolved.
"Based on the evidence before the court, it appears that Section 10.19 was adopted specifically to penalize Planned Parenthood" for the organization's stance in favor of abortion rights, Beaty wrote, even though the law bars the group from using public money for abortions, except in cases of rape, incest or when the mother's life is in danger. Planned Parenthood in North Carolina provides a range of other services, from tests for diabetes and high cholesterol to screening for sexually transmitted diseases.
Federal judges in Kansas and Indiana have blocked at least parts of laws stripping Planned Parenthood chapters of funds, but officials in both states have appealed.
The North Carolina budget provision would have barred Planned Parenthood from funding for contraceptive and teen pregnancy programs. The group says the loss of funding would lead to layoffs, the end of free or low-cost contraceptives for poor women and the closure of its Durham clinic.
Michelle Bachman: Planned Parenthood "corrupt""We feel like this is a tremendous win for women in North Carolina, particularly for those who are poor or uninsured," said Paige Johnson, vice president of public affairs for Planned Parenthood of Central North Carolina, which operates health clinics in Durham, Chapel Hill and Fayetteville.
The next step in the lawsuit will depend largely on whether the state appeals Beaty's injunction. If not, Beaty could have a final decision shortly, Johnson said.
A call Friday night to NC Right to Life, which had supported the provision in the state budget, was not returned.
The provision was part of a state budget passed by the General Assembly, which is controlled by Republicans for the first time in over a century. Although Gov. Beverly Perdue vetoed the spending plan, the legislature mustered enough votes for an override.
In arguments before Beaty earlier this month, state lawyers defending the General Assembly said the budgeting decision doesn't unfairly punish Planned Parenthood because the group could apply directly to the federal government for family planning funds.
But in his 35-page ruling granting the injunction, Beaty said the provision's legislative history makes it clear that the denial of funds was intended as political punishment for the organization. Beaty quoted statements by House Majority Leader Paul Stam, R-Wake, tying Planned Parenthood to the eugenics movement and saying, "We should not be rewarding the perpetrators of that program."
A message left for Stam was not immediately returned Friday night.
Beaty also dismissed the state's argument that the budget is consistent with the General Assembly's policy of "favoring childbirth over abortions," noting that the funds in question can't be used for abortions.
The state, Beaty wrote, "has not presented any evidence or even contention to establish how Section 10.19's ban on using (Planned Parenthood) for non-abortion-related projects is rationally related to a legislative policy of funding childbirth services over abortion services."
With the injunction in place, Johnson said Planned Parenthood hopes to be able to offer its services as usual until the outcome of the larger lawsuit.
"We fully expect to win the case," she said.
Popular on CBSNews.com
- Probe begins after Conn. commuter trains collide
- O.J. Simpson's ex-lawyer contradicts his testimony on guns
- Dozens injured as commuter trains collide in Conn.
- Seven-time lottery winner shares secret to winning Powerball
- Why marry? Three generations tell their wedding stories
- New Yorker's Strongbox: Can it shield anonymous sources?
- Tornadoes rip through northern Texas 17 Photos
- Navy pilot earns degree in combat zone
1) They demand a stop to all abortions (increasing the number of unwanted children)
2) They demand that poor women's health and pregnancy care is cut or eliminated (increasing the likelyhood of more unwanted pregnancies, birth defects and fetal deaths)
3) They demand that the 'freeloaders' that aren't paying federal taxes be forced to pay (so that poor women are forced further into poverty, further into the inability to pay for health care, birth control, baby care, etc. insuring that the number of poor people grow).
That's a real respectable plan there folks. Makes me want to be a right winger or Repubican right away.
Jesus would not be proud of you. Not even slightly.
AND if it's merely being done because Planned Parenthood 'dares' to perform abortions with a seperate source of money, that's likely an illegal act and should be fought in court with lawyers, not in public with people that have agendas. The results should match what the law requires - not what people's opinions are.
They are demanding that funding not be withdrawn illegally.
Two very different things.
Or for the factually challenged - it's similiar to this:
Give me money (not what Planned Parenthood is doing)
vs.
we're taking away the money we would normally give you to help poor women (possibly in an illegal manner) because we don't agree with what you do with the money you get from someone else (which is what the state is doing)
============
Duh.
Social conservatives are the main rot within our society.
.