I have to admit… I got this one wrong.
The state of Oklahoma had asked the Supreme Court for an emergency hearing on aid being withheld over the state’s abortion laws.
The court denied the hearing in a 6-3 ruling that has conservatives up in arms.
But I Thought…
When Donald Trump was in office, the issue of partisan legislation impacting federal funding had come up.
With states now in charge of setting their abortion laws, I thought it was a safe assumption that if Dems were using abortion to hold back funding, the court would overrule the administration.
I was wrong, with only Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch being willing to have the hearing.
It is always a concern when Justice Roberts crosses the aisle because at least one Trump-appointed justice always seems to follow him, but this time two did, defeating the measure.
The denial means that Oklahoma is now without $4.5 million in grants from the Department of Health and Human Services.
Oklahoma argued, “Title X does not unambiguously impose an abortion counseling or referral requirement.
“Therefore, HHS cannot impose an abortion counseling or referral requirement on Title X grantees.”
“HHS deliberately sought to impose the executive branch’s policy preferences on the states, including Oklahoma, and upset the federal state balance on this important issue.”
HHS countered, “The Oklahoma legislature has already provided substitute funding to make up the shortfall created by the termination of last year’s grant, and there is no reason to doubt that it can do the same this year.”
So, just because Oklahoma made up the shortfall, does that mean it is no longer entitled to the money that Congress had allocated?
I have to say, that is a new one to me because I thought it was illegal to hold money back that had already been approved by Congress.
I guess it is just a different set of rules when it is the Democrat Party doing it, even when our justices dominate the court.