In a significant move last week, Heartbeat International filed an amicus brief to the Supreme Court of the United States in support of South Carolina and our friends at Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) against Planned Parenthood South Atlantic. The brief advocates for a healthcare system that prioritizes the well-being of mothers, families, and children at all stages of life.
What is an amicus brief?
An amicus brief is a document submitted to a court by someone who is not directly involved in the case but has a strong interest in the matter. It offers additional information, perspectives, or arguments for the court to consider. In this instance, Heartbeat International's brief emphasizes the importance of South Carolina's stance in the broader context of Medicaid funding and provider qualifications.
The case at hand
The case originated from South Carolina's decision to discontinue its association with Planned Parenthood as a Medicaid provider in the family planning program. This decision aligns with the state’s laws, which prohibit the use of taxpayer dollars for abortions. In 2018, Governor Henry McMaster reinforced this position by signing Executive Order 2018-21, which rightly stated, “abortion clinics’ primary focus on denying the right to life is contrary to and conflicts with the State’s obligation to protect and preserve that right.”
Despite this, Planned Parenthood and a South Carolina citizen challenged the Executive Order in court, leading to the case known as Kerr v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic. The district court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, interpreting Medicaid rules to mean that patients have a "free choice of provider" and an enforceable right to challenge state decisions on provider qualifications. After numerous appeals, the case is now poised for potential review by the Supreme Court.
[Click here to subscribe to Pregnancy Help News!]
Why the Supreme Court should step In
There are two significant circuit splits on this issue, meaning different Courts of Appeals have issued conflicting rulings on similar questions. The Supreme Court often steps in to resolve such discrepancies to provide clear, consistent guidance across the country. The first split involves whether individuals can sue to enforce spending clause statutes, where the federal government funds state-provided services. The second concerns whether individuals have the right to challenge a state's determination of Medicaid-qualified providers.
In its brief, Heartbeat International argued that South Carolina's decision to sever ties with Planned Parenthood was legally and factually sound. The brief also highlighted the essential services provided by pregnancy centers in genuine family planning care, contrasting this with the services offered by Planned Parenthood.
Heartbeat International and its allies now await the Supreme Court's decision on whether to hear the case. They remain hopeful that the Court will take up the matter, leading to a favorable outcome for South Carolina and the pro-life cause.
Tweet This: Heartbeat International filed an amicus brief w/SCOTUS to support South Carolina's bid for state authority over Medicaid provider selection
If the Supreme Court takes the case and rules in favor of South Carolina, it would solidify state authority over Medicaid provider selection, allowing states to exclude organizations like Planned Parenthood. This decision would set a precedent for spending clause statutes, clarify Medicaid policy on patient choice, and be a significant victory for pro-life legislation. It would likely inspire similar actions in other states and shape future legal battles over healthcare and reproductive services.
For those interested in more details, the full amicus brief can be accessed HERE. The SCOTUS case page can be found HERE and the ADF case page is available HERE.
Editor's note: Heartbeat International manages Pregnancy Help News.
