On Thursday morning, there was a huge amount of decisions and updates from the U.S. Supreme Court.
Many were beneficially captured in long threads by X’s legal expert Jonathan Turley.
Buried in that thread, Scotus was Medinav. This was an important decision we made in the case of Planned Parenthood South Atlantic.
Breaking news. A story full of spirit. Subscribe to Charisma on YouTube!
“We have a second opinion. It’s a medina versus planned parent-child relationship, an important case that doesn’t attract much attention,” explained Tarly. “It is written by Judge Gorsach in a 6-3 opinion.”
Turley further explained: “The court has considered whether people have the right to private action to challenge South Carolina’s decision to terminate participation in planned custody in the state’s Medicaid program. The court has said that Medicaid law does not give them a clear right to file a federal civil rights lawsuit.”
As Turning Point USA’s Charlie Kirk pointed out, this creates a legal precedent that prevents taxpayer money from moving towards planned parent-child relationships.
“A big breakthrough for the cause of life. Planned parent-child relationships should never receive taxpayer money,” Kirk argued.
Because of this, and with the planned parent-child relationship, Tarley removed the healthcare facility as a “big loser” in Scotus’ gusts of Thursday.
Get our free charisma newsletter today! Stay up to date with current issues, Holy Spirit News, Christian teachings, charismatic videos and more!
“The big loser today is a planned parent-child relationship,” Tarly argued. “The court ruled in Medina that South Carolina could block public funds and had the right to sue.
“The group said this would have “devastating consequences” as a third of its revenue comes from government funding. ”
The 6-3 Supreme Court decision (opposed by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan) saw Justice Neil Gorsuch write his opinion.
“(Planned Parenthood) alleged that the removal of South Carolina’s planned custody from the Medicaid program violated the provisions of eligible providers,” Gorsuch wrote.
Join Charisma Magazine Online and follow everything the Holy Spirit does all over the world!
(Gorsuch explains the provisions of “any qualified providers” as follows: “This case includes provisions of a qualified provider, which requires that “subjects to guarantee an individual qualifying for medical assistance.”
Most of the Supreme Court clearly did not believe that the crumblingness of the three women’s Liberal justice would be largely violated the provisions of qualified providers.
Alliance Defending Freedom alleged the incident.
This article was originally published in the Western Journal and has been reposted with permission.
