Planned Parenthood Makes Over $250 Million Killing Babies in Abortions

Life News ^ | November 12, 2025 | Dave Andrusko

[Morgana]

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit in Boston heard oral arguments today whether a provision of the July 4 “One Big, Beautiful Bill” that ended Medicaid reimbursements for one year for Planned Parenthood and other big abortion providers can remain in effect while legal challenges continue.

In September, on an unanimous 3-0 vote, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit reversed the earlier preliminary injunctions by Judge Indira Talwani and allowed the Trump administration to resume blocking Medicaid funds to Planned Parenthood while the case proceeded.

Background

Planned Parenthood filed the original lawsuit on July 7, three days after the bill was signed by President Trump. The ever-accommodating Judge Talwani, an Obama appointee, issued a Temporary Restraining Order the same day, followed by a preliminary injunction on July 21. She ruled that Planned Parenthood had shown a “substantial likelihood of success.”

However, in its July 14 memorandum in opposition to the temporary restraining order, HHS wrote

Both houses of Congress passed a budget reconciliation bill—the One Big Beautiful Bill— and the President signed that bill into law. Among many other decisions about how to allocate limited federal funds, one provision of the bill restricts the types of entities that may receive federal Medicaid funds. In particular, that provision directs that certain tax-exempt organizations and their affiliates may not receive federal Medicaid funds for a one-year period if they continue to provide elective abortions. In other words, the bill stops federal subsidies for Big Abortion. All three democratically elected components of the Federal Government collaborated to enact that provision consistent with their electoral mandates from the American people as to how they want their hard-earned taxpayer dollars spent. But Plaintiffs—Planned Parenthood Federation of America (“PPFA”) and its members (together, “Planned Parenthood”)—now want this Court to reject that judgment and supplant duly enacted legislation with their own policy preferences. Indeed, they demand emergency injunctive relief forcing the Government to continue to support them with taxpayer funds.

That request is legally groundless and must be firmly rejected.

Later the memorandum made a crucial, fundamental distinction:

Importantly, the statute does not depend on whether any entity advocates for abortion. Planned Parenthood and its members may continue to engage in First Amendment activity; they can only be disqualified from Medicaid if they continue to provide certain abortions on or after October 1, 2025. If Planned Parenthood and its affiliates cease providing those abortions, they could receive Medicaid funds even as they continue to advocate for abortion. And restricting funding for abortion providers does not violate the First Amendment. [Emphasis in the original.]

“In a report released ahead of the hearing, Planned Parenthood said the legislation cost $45 million in September alone as clinics across the country paid for treatment for Medicaid patients out of pocket — a rate that the organization says is unsustainable,” Safiyah Riddle reported for the Associated Press.

Riddle included this standard Planned Parenthood line in her story. Under the subhead “A range of services hit,” she wrote

Planned Parenthood is the country’s largest abortion provider, but abortions only constituted 4% of all medical services in 2024, according to the organization’s annual report. Testing for sexually transmitted infections and contraception services make up about 80%. The remaining 15% of services are cancer screenings, primary care services and behavioral health services.

Dr. Randall K. O’Bannon, NRL’s director of Education & Research, told NRL News Today, “There’s a reason Planned Parenthood will give up federal funding rather than give up abortion. It’s simply too big a part of the organization’s identity and its bottom line.”

A standard “in-clinic” first-trimester surgical abortions go for $600 or more (chemical abortions cost more), meaning the revenue coming from 400,000+ abortions a year easily dwarfs the receipts coming in from 1.5 million packets of birth control or 170,000 PAP tests (cancer screens).

Money from abortion+ plus its identity as an “abortion provider” are mighty powerful incentives.

---

TOPICS: Business/Economy
KEYWORDS: abortion; abortuary; babykillers; bloodontheirhands; bloodontheirheads; plannedparenthood; prolife

[nickcarraway]

There is something Swiftian in all this.

Look it up if you need to.

[Texas Eagle]

I didn’t read the whole story (I have standards!). Is that just in executioner fees or does that include the money they make from selling the body parts and organs?

[InkStone]

America, PLEASE WAKE UP : this reflects GOD’S JUDGEMENT UPON OUR NATION.
This very thing has happened before; it’s happening in Europe now.
If we FAIL to return to God, thru His Son, Jesus Yeshua the Christ, America will be destroyed.
John 14:6

[MayflowerMadam]

We just have to pray harder, and give more financial support to pro-life women’s resource centers. Our church has a line item in the Budget for our local center, which is expanding soon thanks to a VERY generous donation from an area church.

[Worldtraveler once upon a time]

Without government subsidies and government-enforced requirement for insurance plans to include reimbursements for abortions, the problem would have not grown into this.

Take government out of the abortion "business" and see how the marketplace would react in short order.