Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

NEW: Obama Judge Issues NATIONWIDE Block on Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill Provision Barring Funding for Planned Parenthood
Gateway Pundit ^ | July 28, 2025 | Cristina Laila

Posted on 07/28/2025 12:43:52 PM PDT by Red Badger

A federal judge on Monday expanded a preliminary injunction and blocked Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill Provision barring funding for Planned Parenthood nationwide.

Earlier this month Judge Talwani, an Obama appointee, issued a TRO and temporarily blocked the reconciliation bill’s provision barring funding for Planned Parenthood.

Last Monday, the judge granted a preliminary injunction in part extending a block on barring funding for Planned Parenthood.

Today, Judge Talwani expanded her injunction nationwide.

The judge’s ruling comes after the US Supreme Court largely restricted lower courts from issuing nationwide injunctions.

CNN reported:

A federal judge in Boston has widened her block on the Trump administration’s ability to enforce a provision of President Donald Trump’s sweeping domestic policy law that would defund Planned Parenthood’s health care services.

US District Judge Indira Talwani ruled last week that the administration couldn’t enforce the funding ban against some Planned Parenthood organizations. In a new preliminary injunction issued Monday, the judge blocked enforcement of the law nationwide, saying it applied to the dozens of state and local Planned Parenthood member organizations.

“Patients are likely to suffer adverse health consequences where care is disrupted or unavailable. In particular, restricting Members’ ability to provide healthcare services threatens an increase in unintended pregnancies and attendant complications because of reduced access to effective contraceptives, and an increase in undiagnosed and untreated STIs,” Talwani, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, wrote in the 58-page ruling.

Planned Parenthood sued the Trump Administration over its funding cuts written into the newly-passed reconciliation bill.

The House passed the Big Beautiful Bill earlier this month and President Trump signed in on July 4th at the White House.

“Everyone deserves access to high-quality, affordable health care. That’s what we’ve been fighting for the last century — and we’ll never stop,” President and CEO of Planned Parenthood Alexis McGill Johnson said earlier this month. “We’ll be suing the Trump administration to stop this unlawful attack. See you in court.”


TOPICS: Breaking News; Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: abortion; arrestandexecute; article2; deportindiratalwani; funding; indiratalwani; intercession; judgewatch; judicialcoup; judicialmisconduct; judicialsedition; judicialtreason; noauthority; nojurisdiction; obstruction; plannedparenthood; prolife; sabotage; sedition; subversion; treason; undermining; unlawfulorders
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-137 next last

1 posted on 07/28/2025 12:43:52 PM PDT by Red Badger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Well, good luck with that.


2 posted on 07/28/2025 12:45:37 PM PDT by shelterguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

A ruling in defiance of a SCOTUS decision. Ignore it!


3 posted on 07/28/2025 12:46:56 PM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Import The Third World,Become The Third World)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

another patently illegal “order” imho

it is no wonder that so many folks have zero respect for the judiciary these days


4 posted on 07/28/2025 12:47:35 PM PDT by faithhopecharity ("Politicians aren't born, they're excreted." Marcus Tullius Cicero (106 to 43 BCE))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

This judge sure does hate democracy. Imagine a judge acting like a King.


5 posted on 07/28/2025 12:48:18 PM PDT by The Free Engineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative; Red Badger

Ignore, impeach, and imprison.


6 posted on 07/28/2025 12:48:26 PM PDT by lightman (Beat the Philly fraud machine the Amish did onest, ja? Nein, zweimal they did already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Yes issue injunctions on congressional legislation. 😆


7 posted on 07/28/2025 12:48:49 PM PDT by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: faithhopecharity

The problem is, that distrust bleeds over onto the judges that are right headed and not retarded leftist activists. That hurts everyone


8 posted on 07/28/2025 12:48:56 PM PDT by Maskot (Put every dem/lib in prison........like yesterday!!! )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

It’s amazing to live in a time where Marxist “Judges” think they can use “the rule of law” to ignore “the rule of law.”

It amazing, but not surprising.

To the Left, rules, regulations, laws and statutes are for “others.”

Also, without a conscience or a soul, anything is possible.


9 posted on 07/28/2025 12:50:01 PM PDT by Ronaldus Magnus III (Do, or do not, there is no try - AND - Every Time You Fall Down, Get The Frak Up! )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Indira Talwani. Cut me an effin’ break already. Good Lord!


10 posted on 07/28/2025 12:50:17 PM PDT by johniegrad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger; Publius

This was Legislation passed by Congress.
The judge does not have line-item veto.
Either it is UnConstitutional as passed or it is still in effect.


11 posted on 07/28/2025 12:51:41 PM PDT by Cletus.D.Yokel (There are no more conspiracy theories, only questions that further the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lightman

Pronto!


12 posted on 07/28/2025 12:52:04 PM PDT by No name given ( Anonymous is who you’ll know me as)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Another demonrat judge we need to remove from the bench.


13 posted on 07/28/2025 12:52:33 PM PDT by No name given ( Anonymous is who you’ll know me as)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger
The judge’s ruling comes after the US Supreme Court largely restricted lower courts from issuing nationwide injunctions.

Then carry on Mr. Trump. The USSC ruling overrides any decision made by some leftist lower court hack judge.
14 posted on 07/28/2025 12:53:52 PM PDT by Signalman (When your enemy is digging himself a hole, don't take away his shovel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger
It is shocking how many Indians have risen to powerful positions. They weren't born here. They have no deep loyalty to America. They are occupiers. Despicable.


15 posted on 07/28/2025 12:55:02 PM PDT by DeplorablePaul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Without a sound, constitutional basis in the opinion, the decision of the federal judge is null and void.

Fugeddaboudditt!!!


16 posted on 07/28/2025 12:55:38 PM PDT by Jim W N (MAGA by restoring the Gospel of the Grace of Christ (Jude 3) and our Free Constitutional Republic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

So Congress passed a bill that doesn’t fund planned parenthood and the POTUS signed the bill. The SCOTUS has already stated that district judges should not interfere by issue national injunctions.

This judge believes that this process violates the law and planned parenthood should be funded so they issue a national injunction forcing the continued funding for planned parenthood by the taxpayers.

I have a Great idea. The Judge can sell everything they own, sign over all salary and retirement, to fund planned parenthood until they run out of money. I don’t want my tax dollars going to unconstitutional judges or planned parenthood for abortions, but the judge is welcome to give up all worldly possessions to make a point before the SCOTUS and Congress come knocking.


17 posted on 07/28/2025 12:55:55 PM PDT by Pete Dovgan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

The judge disagrees with where funding was *not* allocated in the budget Congress enacted, therefore has ordered it allocated and ordered for the President to disregard the budget?

Now here is an actual “Constitutional crisis” in the making. Will the press report it as such?


“Patients are likely to suffer adverse health consequences where care is disrupted or unavailable. In particular, restricting Members’ ability to provide healthcare services threatens an increase in unintended pregnancies and attendant complications because of reduced access to effective contraceptives, and an increase in undiagnosed and untreated STIs,” Talwani, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, wrote in the 58-page ruling.

Doubtful that is true as the funding is going to other institutions that are not abortion providers to provide the identical services, but even if it is true, that’s completely irrelevant - whether it is a “good” act of Congress or not in the eyes of the judge or anyone else has nothing to do with whether or not it is a valid, constitutionally enacted law. This “judge” has no idea of even the basics of constitutional law and the role of the judiciary - yet somehow graduated law school and got admitted to the bar. This is embarrassing.


18 posted on 07/28/2025 12:57:38 PM PDT by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Would the judge like a free late term abortion? That question needs to be asked to separate the posers from the true believers.


19 posted on 07/28/2025 12:58:08 PM PDT by MtnClimber (For photos of scenery, wildlife and climbing, click on my screen name for my FR home page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

The judges name says it all. Seems these pathetic insane nudges don’t know or care what the supreme court rules.


20 posted on 07/28/2025 1:00:25 PM PDT by Ronald77
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-137 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson