Radical Judge Blocks Act of Congress Signed by President

The “One Big Beautiful Bill” (OBBB) has its warts, but it was passed by Congress and signed by the President of the United States. That should make it law if you believe in the constitutional process as commonly understood. However, a radical Boston, MA federal district judge, Indira Talwani, appointed by Barack Obama, thinks she can countermand the constitutional process by blocking a provision of the OBBB that defunded Planned Parenthood. Rachel K. Paulose reports in The Spectator:

This week, a lone federal district court judge in Boston, Massachusetts, with nary a citation to the Constitution, statutes or the applicable Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, entered a temporary restraining order prohibiting the federal defunding of Planned Parenthood. The basis for Judge Indira Talwani’s order is left for the public to surmise. Perhaps the good judge will fill in the blanks before the next hearing planned in the case, within two weeks; or perhaps not, since TROs are generally not appealable. Either way, the judge’s barren two-page order, as it stands, is a textbook example of a lawless judiciary engaged in policymaking from the bench.

Among the many pro-life measures of President Trump’s One Big, Beautiful Bill is a provision terminating Medicaid funding to nonprofit abortion clinics. Planned Parenthood, which receives one third of its funding from American taxpayers, claims it will be forced to close 200 of its 600 clinics when it is booted off what President Trump refers to as the federal gravy train. Planned Parenthood filed suit in federal court to enjoin what its CEO has described as an “existential” threat to its ongoing operations, which are largely centered on the 400,000 abortions it performs each year. Without even granting the government the opportunity to respond, Judge Talwani granted Planned Parenthood’s motion.

To be fair, Judge Talwani is not alone in her public policy grandstanding. She was actively led astray by Planned Parenthood’s 53-page complaint, an angry screed that rails against the Trump administration for keeping its political promises; presumes that Congress must be conscripted to fund Planned Parenthood into perpetuity; and declares a utopian vision untethered to any law: “Planned Parenthood envisions a world of equity: where sexual and reproductive rights are basic human rights, where access to health care does not depend on who you are, where you live, or your ability to pay, and where every person has the opportunity to choose their own path to a healthy and meaningful life.” Notably, none of this language appears in the Constitution of the United States.

As for the legal basis of Planned Parenthood’s lawsuit, that too is mystifying. Count one asserts the bill “constitutes… a bill of attainder.” Since its roots in ancient England, bills of attainder were understood to refer to criminal punishments, not civil legislation authorized in due course. Indeed, in its most recent opinion on the subject, the Supreme Court decreed that applying the term “bill of attainder” to the political process “would cripple the very process of legislating.”

Read more here.