The Trump Administration's Latest Move Could Effectively Defund Planned Parenthood

Amelia Harnish

Update: Multiple lawsuits have been filed to challenge the Trump Administration's so-called "gag rule."

The rule, released in late February, changes how funds of the federal family planning program, Title X, are distributed. It effectively blocks Planned Parenthood and other clinics that provide or refer for abortion from participating.

The first suit was filed by Planned Parenthood and the American Medical Association in Oregon. It argues that the Trump Administration's rule change would "radically" alter the program requirements and politicize the delivery of healthcare to the detriment of patients.

The Trump-Pence administration’s gag rule is unethical, illegal, and harmful to public health, which is why Planned Parenthood is joining together with the American Medical Association to sue to protect patients’ rights and access to health care," Leana Wen, MD, president of Planned Parenthood said in statement emailed to Refinery29. "Families that are struggling to make ends meet and people who live in rural areas must have the same access to full, unbiased information from their doctor as everyone else."

The second was filed in Maine by the Center for Reproductive Rights on behalf of Maine Family Planning, the state's largest reproductive health provider and largest Title X grantee in the state as well.

“The Trump administration’s ‘Global Gag Rule’ has had a disastrous effect on women around the world,” said Nancy Northup, President and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights in a statement. “Now, the administration is coming after health care providers in the U.S. to destroy the provision of comprehensive, medically accurate reproductive health care. We’ve filed suit today to stop that from happening.”

To learn more about the rule change and how it might affect women across the country, keep reading below for our original story from February 22, 2019.

***

On Friday, the Trump Administration's Office of Population Affairs published the final text of proposed changes that will effectively block Planned Parenthood and other clinics that provide or even mention abortions from receiving a type of federal funds.

The new document, which is 312 pages long, outlines a series of rule changes related to how the federal government distributes money allocated for the family planning grant program known as Title X. This program, which was created in 1970 with bipartisan support, provided $286.5 million in 2018 to pay for free or low-cost birth control, as well as other preventive care like STI screenings, for low-income women. Each year, Title X serves 4 million women through healthcare providers who receive grants from the government to provide services. (This would not affect reimbursement by Medicaid, a separate program.)

The major changes include a new requirement that all participating Title X providers "maintain physical and financial separation from locations which provide abortion as a method of family planning." This means that any clinic or doctor's office that also offers abortions is no longer allowed to receive federal grants that would help provide free or low-cost birth control for low-income women.

Although a spokesperson from the Health and Human Services Department, which oversees Title X, told Refinery29 via email that the Trump administration"seeks to serve more women and men than previously served in the Title X program," advocates say the new changes will do precisely the opposite.

Reproductive rights advocates say this is a direct attack on Planned Parenthood, which via the organization's nationwide network of family planning clinics, is currently the largest provider of Title X-funded birth control services. Roughly 41% of patients receiving birth control funded by Title X get those prescriptions at a Planned Parenthood clinic.

In a conference call with the leaders of major medical organizations and reporters this afternoon, Leana Wen, MD, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, described the new rules as "unconscionable" and "unworkable," and vowed to use "every avenue to make sure this rule never goes into effect.”

As Refinery29 previously reported, there is major concern that the rule changes will result in women losing access to much-needed birth control and other preventive health services, such as cancer and STI screenings. According to one Guttmacher Institute analysis, other reproductive health clinics would have to increase their patient caseloads by 70% i f Planned Parenthood was excluded from the Title X program. "Community health centers have said already they are unable to fill this gap," said Niva Lubin-Johnson, MD, president of the National Medical Association, an organization representing African-American physicians, on the call.

The new rules also include strict guidelines around what participating providers can and cannot say about pregnancy and abortion. In short, participating providers will no longer be required to offer both pregnancy or abortion counseling, as they were before. Now they are only permitted to offer "nondirective pregnancy counseling" and crucially, they are prohibited from even referring women to abortion providers.

Reproductive health experts have referred to this change as a "gag rule" because it limits what providers can and cannot say to patients. Major medical associations including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the American Medical Association have opposed the rule on the grounds that it violates medical ethics to keep information from patients.

Dr. Lubin-Johnson added that the loss of available services as well as the gag rule would hit Black women particularly hard. "Withholding information from patients is a radical departure from how healthcare has been administered in this country and a clear violation of medical ethics,” she said, adding that this would only serve to deepen mistrust between communities of color and the healthcare system.

"This will have dire and disproportionate consequences for hispanics and the underserved," added Judith Flores, MD, chair of the board of directors at the National Hispanic Medical Association. "As physicians we cannot silently standby and allow the Trump Administration to increase healthcare disparities."

In addition, the new rules include changes to the reporting requirements for how the funds will be used, and for services rendered to sexual abuse victims. They also require providers to encourage family involvement in birth control decisions, especially for minors, which Planned Parenthood and ACOG representatives noted is a red flag. "Providers should be able to use their discretion on whether the family should be allowed to weigh in or not," said Lisa M. Hollier, MD, president of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

Federal law already prohibits federal funding from paying for abortion services. "The Department believes that there should be a visible separation between the Title X program and activities involving abortion as a method of family planning," a spokesperson from the U.S. department of Health and Human Services, which oversees Title X, said in an email to Refinery29.

The new rules are not yet official. They still need to be published in the Federal Register and get through the 60-day waiting period to go into effect. Reproductive rights advocates fully expect lawsuits challenging the rule to be filed before that happens.

"Title X is our nation’s gold-standard family planning program that serves low-income patients for free. Now the Trump administration wants to prevent Title X patients from receiving full information about their care options and drive many of the most experienced health care providers from the program," said Ruth Harlow, ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project Senior Staff Attorney, in a statement emailed to Refinery29. "Nobody should be denied access to reproductive health care or receive inadequate care because of their lack of income." The ACLU confirmed that they are currently reviewing the legal options and are committed to fighting back.

Planned Parenthood's Deputy Director of Public Policy Litigation and Law Carrie Flaxman said that the organization is still reviewing the legal options, but is committed to fighting it.

A similar rule was proposed in 1988 by the Reagan Administration. It was immediately challenged in the courts, with the case ultimately making it all the way to the Supreme Court, which ruled in favor of the Reagan Administration. However, the rule never went into effect because by the time of the decision, President Bill Clinton had assumed office and changed the policies anyway.

In the meantime, Dr. Wen had this message for Planned Parenthood's patients: "Our doors are open, and we will be here to serve all those who need us.”

Like what you see? How about some more R29 goodness, right here?

Lauren Underwood Just Expertly Grilled Kirstjen Nielsen On Family Separations

The Founder Of Girls Who Code Wants Women To Lose (& Win)

This Man Is Suing An Alabama Clinic Where His Ex-Girlfriend Got An Abortion

More From

  • We Wish-Listed The Best Deals From Nordstrom’s Anniversary Sale

    Nordstrom didn’t get to where it is today by being fairweather or flaky. The 119-year-old retailer is a bastion of reliability and loyalty, with winning customer service and plenty of perks for the shoppers that support the store with returning purchases. Such devotion is most evident during its annually anticipated Anniversary Sale: when the company treats its most dedicated acolytes (aka customers with Nordstrom credit cards) to a members-only sneak peek of the premium deals a full two weeks early. Today, the sale opened up to “Influencer” cardholders — the third tier of Nordy Club membership. Even though we’re not cardholders, we were still able to comb the Anniversary Sale selection for the best bets thanks to Nordstrom’s “Wish List” feature, which enables anyone to preview sale prices and compile a pie-in-the-sky shopping list. And you are a lucky Nordy cardholder, then you’ve come to the right place for a streamlined edit of deals worth snagging in advance. Ahead, we overturned a plethora of scores across fashion and beauty that will have you filling up your cart to capacity; whether it’s a pair of lime-hued shearling slippers, a sunflower-yellow thong, or a pair of sporty palazzo pants that are as chic as they are comfy. At Refinery29, we’re here to help you navigate this overwhelming world of stuff. All of our market picks are independently selected and curated by the editorial team. All product details reflect the price and availability at the time of publication. If you buy something we link to on our site, Refinery29 may earn commission.Like what you see? How about some more R29 goodness, right here?What We Know About Nordstrom's Anniversary SalePre-Anniversary Deals From Nordstrom's Made SaleYou Haven't Seen Eileen Fisher Like This Before

  • Ted Cruz Is The Only Person Still Using Soy Lattes As A Punchline

    Republican Texas Senator Ted Cruz is nothing if not a beacon of truth telling. Unless that truth doesn’t benefit him directly. Amid stalled negotiations between Congressional lawmakers hoping to secure a relief package for Americans struggling under the economic challenges wrought by the COVID-19 pandemic, Cruz took to Twitter on Monday to make light of the dire situation.After Democratic Massachusetts Senator Ed Markey suggested that every American receive “$2000/month for the duration of the pandemic, $2000/month for 3 months after that, and $2000/month retroactive to March,” in order to offset the economic challenges caused by the pandemic, Cruz derided the plan by invoking a tried-and-true Republican trope: the soy latte.“Why be so cheap?” Cruz asked. “Give everyone $1 million a day, every day, forever. And three soy lattes a day. And a foot massage. We have a magic money tree — we should use it!”Cruz, who made light of mass economic despair plaguing millions in America, is, of course, just among the many Republicans to push back against any sort of reform aid. Conservatives have long used sensationalist rhetoric around the spending of middle and working class Americans to sidestep inconvenient truths about just how hard it is to stretch a dollar in today’s current economic climate. And it’s not just politicians who rely on dangerous ideas about laziness and frivolous spending in order to dismiss concerns about wage stagnation: In a widely ridiculed “sample budget” designed to show how its employees could easily sustain themselves on a minimum wage salary, McDonald’s famously allotted only $20 a month to health insurance spending, and also used money earned at a second job to calculate net income.During the COVID-19 pandemic, Republicans have fallen back on one of their most-relied on talking points to suggest that “government handouts,” like the $600 weekly federal stimulus benefit that expired in July, disincentivizes people from getting back to work. But that’s far from the truth of the matter. In fact, research has repeatedly shown that direct cash transfers — sometimes referred to as universal basic income, or “mincome,” for short — have no impact on an individual’s propensity to perform labor.“It’s not a goddamn joke Ted,” Markey, who is currently campaigning against Rep. Joe Kennedy III ahead of Massachusetts’ September 1 primary election, replied. “Millions of families are facing hunger, the threat of eviction, and the loss of their health care during a pandemic that is worsening every day. Get real.”Cruz, for his part, is one to talk about money growing on trees, especially when considering that he supported the Republican-backed plan to earmark $500 billion in loans from the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve to be used in order to revive struggling businesses. It’s also worth noting that Cruz himself even personally spearheaded an initiative to expand that program to include much larger companies, and sought to increase the maximum loan amount from $150 million to $200 million for struggling companies.As for the line about the foot massages, yes, of course it’s disgusting coming from Ted Cruz, but as history tells us, that’s not really his thing anyway. Plus, who drinks soy lattes anymore? A word to Ted: next time if you want to make a joke at the expense of millennials, oat milk is the superior punchline.Like what you see? How about some more R29 goodness, right here?AOC Schooled Ted Cruz On Twitter Over CoronavirusKellyanne Conway Is Loudly Anti-"Big Tech"So, Who Is The Lincoln Project Even For?

  • Katie Hill Is Reclaiming Her Story After The Worst Year Of Her Life

    In 2018, Katie Hill achieved a goal that she had been thinking about ever since she was chosen “Most Likely to Become the First Woman President” in preschool (right after being labeled “too bossy” by her teacher). At 31, she was elected as the first woman and youngest person to represent California’s 25th District in Congress, flipping the long-red area blue. The daughter of a cop and an ER nurse, Hill was part of the 2018 Blue Wave of “regular” women whose entry into politics hadn’t felt preordained and who ran in response to Donald Trump’s election. Although she had once considered becoming a nurse like her mom and grandmother, Hill felt like the electoral victory was a dream come true.  Once she started her term, Hill quickly ascended to leadership positions in Congress and worked closely with Speaker Nancy Pelosi. However, even as her professional life was flourishing, Hill’s personal life was spinning out of control. Back home in California, her relationship with her husband, Kenny Heslep, had started unraveling as he became increasingly abusive, erupting in frequent angry outbursts, monitoring her whereabouts and phone calls, and even walking around with a loaded gun during their fights. Hill and Heslep are now separated, but, as Hill reveals in her new book, She Will Rise, anytime she tried to leave him, he told her, “I will ruin you.” A few months after Hill moved out and said she wanted a divorce, Heslep allegedly made good on his threat. In October 2019, hundreds of Hill’s intimate photos and private text messages were leaked to a right-wing tabloid and quickly spread across the internet. Hill says Heslep sent the photos as revenge against her for leaving him. Heslep claims he was “hacked.”The publication of these photos and texts resulted in weeks of gratuitous, lurid coverage of Hill’s private life that also revealed she had been in a polyamorous relationship with Heslep and a woman who worked on her campaign. Hill says she regrets that relationship and has also apologized for it, acknowledging its imbalanced power dynamic. Still, she was furious and humiliated. Hill says she discovered that Heslep had, without her consent, created profiles for them on sites like Cruise Ship Mingle, and, during her congressional campaign, posted pictures of her on the subreddit “r/wouldyoufuckmywife.” Amid this personal nightmare, Hill had to make painful deliberations about her dream job. She eventually decided that the only way to make things right would be to resign from Congress, despite many, including her mentor Pelosi, urging her to stay. Hill gave a powerful resignation speech that slammed society’s sexist double standards, which allow men who have been accused of sexual assault (hi, Donald Trump) to stay in power. “I’m leaving because of a misogynistic culture that gleefully consumed my naked pictures, capitalized on my sexuality, and enabled my abusive ex to continue that abuse, this time with the entire country watching,” Hill said. “Yes, I’m stepping down, but I refuse to let this experience scare off other women who dare to take risks, who dare to step into this light.”Hill’s detractors — an online horde of misogynist trolls, Republicans interested in her House seat, and, of course, her ex — undoubtedly wanted her to run away in shame after her resignation, never to be heard from again. But Hill has not given them that satisfaction. With She Will Rise, she has reclaimed her narrative, telling her story the way that she wants the world to know it — not the way The Daily Mail told it. The book is both autobiographical and instructive, serving as an exhaustive primer on the recent history of feminism, including reproductive rights, the MeToo movement, and women running for office — it’s no coincidence it comes out near the 100th anniversary of the passage of the 19th Amendment, which gave women the right to vote. In it, Hill devotes plenty of space to give her audience tools and resources so they, too, can help change the way women are treated in society. Her goal, it seems, is to prove that while many women’s stories become erased or written over, women have the power to write them all over again. “I hope that by me being so transparent and vulnerable, it helps some people understand what happened and others can learn from my experience,” Hill told Refinery29 in a recent interview. And she does get vulnerable: Not only is she unflinching in her descriptions of the painful, guilt-ridden days after her public resignation, but she is also open in discussing moments of suicidal ideation, years of abuse, and other viscerally painful experiences.Even though she says that writing this book felt triumphant and cathartic, Hill is candid about the fact that she still struggles with the aftermath of years of trauma. “It’s something that takes continual work and I think anyone who’s been through trauma, whatever kind it might be, knows that all too well,” Hill, who is in therapy, told me. Terrible nightmares about her ex, which often cause her to wake up in terror, haunt her nightly. “I got into this relationship when I was 16 years old,” she said. “I’m constantly trying to figure out who I am as a person on my own, without this relationship defining me — it played a part in defining me for so long, for half of my life.” > I got into this relationship when I was 16 years old. I’m constantly trying to figure out who I am as a person on my own, without this relationship defining me — it played a part in defining me for so long, for half of my life.> > katie hillHill’s resignation did not signal the end of her personal troubles. In January of this year, Hill’s mother was hospitalized and underwent brain surgery; she has since recovered, and gone back to work as a trauma nurse in L.A. “She’s being so brave and strong for so many people in spite of everything that she’s been through,” Hill said. Three days after the surgery, while her mother was still in the hospital, Hill found her younger brother, Danny, dead from a drug overdose. Danny, a U.S. sailor who was training to become a Navy SEAL, was 20 years old. They were extremely close, just like she is with her mother.Another person who has helped give Hill the strength and confidence to share her story is her late grandfather, who is a central figure in the book. He taught her about politics and to be a “warrior,” which gave her the courage to run for office — and to speak out after scandal threatened to ruin her. It turned out, though, that her grandfather was a much more complicated figure than the hero she’d always seen him as. After he passed away in 2011 after a battle with Alzheimer’s disease, she slowly began to learn how he had abused her grandmother Sarah, who he had divorced when Hill was 2. Learning about this forced Hill to reckon with their relationship and what it meant that her grandfather had a history of abuse, just like her own ex.“As I was writing, to me it just became so clear that there was this complex human dynamic where it doesn’t erase the fact that someone was so important to you, it doesn’t erase whatever has been meaningful in your relationship or what they’ve done in their lives, but they can be flawed and they can have done terrible things to people,” she told me. “And so, I think it is something that we have to reconcile for public figures but also for people in our lives, kind of on a daily basis. Forgiveness and being able to hold those two truths in your mind is part of the healing process for me.”Hill says she has spent a lot of time thinking about redemption — who gets to have it and who doesn’t, who gets to own their narrative and who doesn’t. Many of the men originally outed in the MeToo movement either returned to their jobs or found different, equivalent ones. Would she be afforded the same redemption arc? Ultimately, Hill doesn’t have a neat answer to that question. Nor does she have an answer to questions that she poses in her book, like: “Did I unintentionally perpetuate any of the abusive behaviors I myself had endured for so long?” And: “How many people did I hurt because of it all?” Hill’s grief and guilt linger — about the relationship with her staffer, about her brother, about the fact that her House seat has gone to a Republican again — even though she is working on herself every day. But she has been able to turn these depths of despair into action, which has helped her heal. One of the ways she’s working through her trauma is helping other women find their voices and speak out against injustice. Since resigning, Hill has launched a PAC called HER Time, through which she is helping women candidates run for office, particularly young women and women of color. She is also at work on the Naked Politics podcast, which launches later this month. But will she ever run for office again? “I’m not writing anything off,” she said, but also made it clear that now is not the time. She is, however, living in D.C. and has been seen around Capitol Hill, an indication that she could be sticking around politics for the long haul.Through telling her story in her book, launching her PAC, and starting a podcast, Hill is slowly learning about who she is as a person without her ex. She knows there are people who want to stop not only her, but also all women who are vocal about their experiences. But she also knows that her fight is bigger than her opponents. “I think what some people want is for me to disappear,” Hill told me. “That’s a decision I’ve chosen not to make.” Like what you see? How about some more R29 goodness, right here?Katie Hill Rips Republicans Who Flipped Her SeatKatie Hill Talks Her Mental Health StrugglesKatie Hill Slams Congress' Sexist Double Standard

  • Trump’s Plan To Deliver A Speech At Gettysburg Has Incurred Twitter’s Wrath

    Twitter, as it often does, had some questions for Donald Trump on Monday when “Gettysburg” began trending on the social media platform thanks to the president’s latest election-related tweet. Trump announced that the location of where he would accept the Republican Party’s nomination for his reelection was coming soon, tweeting that “We have narrowed the Presidential Nomination Acceptance Speech, to be delivered on the final night of the Convention (Thursday), to two locations — The Great Battlefield of Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, and the White House, Washington, D.C. We will announce the decision soon!”The suggestion that he might host his acceptance speech at Gettysburg — the site of a literal war brought on by Confederates in the South — naturally left room for wide criticism. At Twitter’s obvious behest, many pundits pointed out how Trump’s gross choice of location speaks to his recent defense of confederate behavior (like protecting monuments and denouncing the Black Lives Matter movement), as well as just his general fascist-like conduct. The results? Well, here are some pointed criticisms:> Gettysburg would be quite the choice, given the president’s recent defense of generals from the side that lost that battle https://t.co/vKbzGaCnrU> > — Jonathan Lemire (@JonLemire) August 10, 2020> He knows his side lost at Gettysburg, doesn’t he? pic.twitter.com/F3wkxIdYdu> > — Jed Shugerman (@jedshug) August 10, 2020> If he gives the speech at Gettysburg he absolutely should be required by law to put on a fake beard> > — Seth Mandel (@SethAMandel) August 10, 2020> but gettysburg is the site of one of your base’s greatest defeats https://t.co/cqYmqvHt5b> > — Oliver Willis (@owillis) August 10, 2020While Trump’s behavior and defense of white supremacy is always shocking, it should come as little to no surprise at this point. Trump has gone to bat numerous times over the years for the preservation of the Confederate Army’s past: from threatening to veto bills seeking to rename military bases after generals like Gen. Robert E. Lee, to his long standing defense of the presence of Confederate statues around the U.S., which dates back to at least 2017. His ardent defense of the symbols and names made famous because of the Confederate Army has raised eyebrows for years considering the Confederacy was infamously pro-slavery and compiled of white supremacists. He has also championed the lives of famous Confederate generals, whether he fully has a grasp on what they stood for or not. But tweeting that Gettysburg is in the running for where he wants to give his acceptance speech is especially ironic given that the Confederate Army lost against the Union Army during the Battle of Gettysburg in 1863. Calling it the “Great Battlefield,” Trump is now just blatantly supporting the bigoted beliefs that mounted into the Confederate Army, and he is doing so at a time when the country is seeking justice for violence against Black people. But some onlookers voiced more serious concerns with Trump’s possible presence at Gettysburg, given that more than 3,500 Union soldiers are buried at the Gettysburg National Cemetery. Many noted that Trump giving the speech atop their many graves is a sign of disrespect, given what the Union stood for. Others likened his possible presence as the beginnings of another Civil War.The Republican National Convention takes place on Monday, August 24 and ends on Thursday, August 27, when Trump will make his announcement. Until then, one can only hope he picks literally anywhere that wasn’t the site of a Confederate-induced war for his acceptance speech.Like what you see? How about some more R29 goodness, right here?Trump Wanted His Face On Mount Rushmore. OK!Trump Gives TikTok 45 Days To Sell To U.S. CompanyTrump: Joe Biden Will "Hurt God" If Elected