It was a poor case in that Kansas and Louisiana both admitted they were withholding the money for “health services for low-income women.” Get one where they actually admit they’re using the money for abortions and I bet it’ll be a 100% go. Legally you can’t give them an out where they can claim that the money is being used for something else. Yes, we all know PP doesn’t even really do mammograms or anything else but that’s what they’ll claim they do with even to the SCOTUS and, if you look at the history of this case, both states did a poor job of proving otherwise. In short, it’s a bad case and this is a good dodge. It allows the issue to be brought up again with a better case where documented money goes to PP FOR abortions and that money can be tracked.
It’s a specious argument made against Kansas and Louisiana. Every penny given to PP frees up more money for abortions and direct political activism.
I like your logic.