[Alberta's Child]

Actually, what this ruling means is that states don't have the authority to make their own decisions about Medicaid funding that comes from the Federal government.

Find me one state that voluntarily rejects any and all Medicaid funding, and I'll relocate there within six months.

[mewzilla]

And I’ll join you.

[ScottfromNJ]

“Actually, what this ruling means is that states don’t have the authority to make their own decisions about Medicaid funding that comes from the Federal government.”

Correct, and here’s an example. States recently were given the right to issue work requirements for Medicaid recipients, but only after Trump who was authorized by federal law, issued an order permitting them do do so if they choose. Judges shouldn’t be in the business of rewriting laws. What the Republicans should do is correct this with legislation, whether or not they have the will to do so is another matter.

[The Pack Knight]

This isn’t really a ruling at all. It is just the Court declining to resolve a circuit split on whether you can bring a 1983 suit over Medicaid funding. To the extent it is a “ruling,” it means that if you live in some parts of the country, you can sue state officials if you don’t like how they spend Medicaid dollars, and in other parts of the country you cannot.

[Vaduz]

Medicaid has nothing to do with planned parenthood.