The anti-abortion movement’s attempts to defund Planned Parenthood through President Donald Trump’s signature “big, beautiful bill” were stalled this week after a federal judge blocked the provision indefinitely.
But the groups that pushed for Planned Parenthood to lose Medicaid reimbursement remain confident that the ruling will eventually be repealed if it winds up in front of the conservative-leaning Supreme Court. Yet, the battle will likely be drawn into the thick of the 2026 midterm election campaigns, as the GOP fights to maintain control of the House.
“I think there’s a lot of confidence in the White House and Department of Justice that this case will ultimately be ruled in their favor,” said Noah Brandt, head of government affairs for the anti-abortion group Live Action. “So this is just a temporary setback.”
“This is not new. I mean, we’ve been battling this for a long time,” said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council. “I think we’re making progress. You know, to use a football analogy, we’re inching toward the first down.”
A provision in the legislation was originally meant to strip Planned Parenthood of Medicaid reimbursements for 10 years. But to meet Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough’s requirements, GOP lawmakers limited the ban on reimbursements to just one year for any healthcare provider receiving more than $800,000 annually in Medicaid funds that also provides abortion services.
If the measure hadn’t been blocked, it would have been the most significant victory for the anti-abortion movement since Roe v. Wade was overturned in 2022. But the politics of limiting abortion isn’t as clean-cut this time around.
Students for Life Action, a group that is pushing for Congress to defund Planned Parenthood beyond one year, has called for the Republican-controlled Senate to ignore or reject MacDonough’s decisions as it works through a second reconciliation package.
“The parliamentarian is not a legislator. It’s an advisory role,” said SFLA Vice President of Media & Policy Kristi Hamrick. “The Senate did not need to use her as an adviser. They could have decided not to use her advice.”
“We believe that the parliamentarian 100% needs to be replaced before we go back and do this again,” she continued. “And yes, I do think we have to go back and keep going.”
U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston claimed in her ruling that the closure of Planned Parenthood clinics will have “adverse health consequences where care is disrupted or unavailable.” Talwani’s ruling replaces a previous preliminary injunction she had issued.
The Department of Health and Human Services is appealing the case to the First Circuit Court of Appeals, a liberal circuit where all five active judges are Democratic appointees. “We strongly disagree with the court’s decision. States should not be forced to fund organizations that have chosen political advocacy over patient care,” said Andrew Nixon, director of communications for HHS. “This ruling undermines state flexibility and disregards long-standing concerns about accountability.”
Other anti-abortion advocates scoffed at the ruling.
“Some radical judges have always ignored their roles as judges, acting as super-legislatures, to circumvent the will of the people,” said Penny Nance, CEO and president of Concerned Women for America. “That was the case with Roe v. Wade. But they lost in the long run. And the same will happen here.”
Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, told the Washington Examiner her group was “confident the Trump administration is aggressively defending the law and will ultimately prevail.”
Dannenfelser cited the Washington Post editorial board’s recent criticism of Talwani’s ruling as “judicial activism.”
“As the piece noted, the provision to stop forced taxpayer funding of the abortion industry was passed by Congress ‘fair and square,’ and we expect her politicized decision to be swiftly overturned,” Dannenfelser added. “Right now, our focus is on ensuring this historic victory is fully defended. But we will also be exploring every avenue moving forward to continue dismantling and defunding the Big Abortion industry led by Planned Parenthood.”
Even other experts expect that Talwani’s ruling will eventually be overturned.
“I think that this judge’s ruling will eventually be overturned on appeal, but I don’t know if that is all going to be done in the next year,” said Mary Ruth Ziegler, a law professor who studies the politics of reproduction at the University of California, Davis. “Which means that Republicans are going to have to decide amongst themselves how much do they care about seeing this defunding through the end, versus losing potentially House seats that they can’t afford to lose?”
Vulnerable House Republicans in blue states such as New York and California may not have the appetite to extend a ban on Medicaid reimbursements for Planned Parenthood further next year if the battle for the House is razor-thin.
A June poll from health think tank KFF showed that 67% of the public opposed stopping healthcare payments to Planned Parenthood and similar clinics, while 32% supported this provision.
Several Planned Parenthood clinics in southwest Ohio and Santa Cruz, California, will remain closed even after Talwani’s ruling.
A separate lawsuit from Democratic attorneys general representing 22 states, including California, New York, Connecticut, and Washington, D.C., took aim at the Trump administration for stripping Planned Parenthood of federal funds. The attorneys general argued it was unconstitutional to defund Planned Parenthood and that the provision “will prevent Planned Parenthood health centers from providing health care to millions of Americans who rely on Medicaid for their essential healthcare needs.”
Perkins, of the Family Research Council, claimed Democrats were not on the winning side of the issue.
“From a standpoint of where taxpayers want their money to go when we have $37 trillion in debt, an organization that is primarily focused on ending the lives of unborn children, I don’t think it’s a winning message for Democrats,” he said. “So I don’t shy away from this being a midterm election issue.”
The uncertainty over abortion access is a boon for advocates who want to throttle Planned Parenthood.
“Every time a Planned Parenthood closes, I do think that that’s a celebration for the pro-life community,” said Amanda Roberti, a professor of political science who studies the politics of sex and reproduction at San Francisco State University. “The chaos while these cases get litigated is part of the harm that happens.”
“I don’t think that they’re winning the full-out war here, but they are definitely winning battles,” Roberti added about the anti-abortion movement.
As Congress considers a second reconciliation package, advocates are adamant that anti-abortion funding will need to be included.
JUDGE BLOCKS PLANNED PARENTHOOD DEFUNDING PROVISION OF ONE BIG BEAUTIFUL BILL ACT
“Since the Republicans went with only one year, we will certainly be arguing, and are already arguing, that if it’s one year, why not five?” said Hamrick, with Students for Life Action. “Because we have said this publicly, Students for Life Action will score any return of funds to Planned Parenthood in the abortion industry, and I think others will be concerned as well.”
“We’re in talks right now with members of Congress about writing the next reconciliation package,” said Brandt of Live Action. “It is priority No. 1 of the movement to ensure that the defunding of Planned Parenthood is extended. And in my book, the first fight is to try to do it permanently. Secondarily would be for a longer period of time. The one year is not a good situation for anyone. The one-year even puts your congressional Republicans in a tough bind of having to continually revote on this.”
Gabrielle Etzel contributed to this report.