Oklahoma has been in an ongoing conflict with the Supreme Court over its unwillingness to connect pregnant women to a countrywide hotline that provides information about abortion and other options. On Tuesday, the state’s emergency petition to restore a $4.5 million funding for family planning services was refused.
While the brief order omitted the usual rationale from the court, it did state that Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch, three judges, would have agreed with Oklahoma.
Oklahoma was not in violation of federal law when the federal Health and Human Services Department withdrew funding. This was upheld by lower courts.
Since the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision to overturn Roe v. Wade and numerous states run by Republicans banned abortion, tensions between states with restrictive abortion laws and the federal government’s family planning program, Title X, have only increased, giving rise to the current lawsuit.
While the relevant federal regulation prohibits clinics from using federal family planning funds to pay for abortions, it does require them to provide patients with information regarding abortion upon request. A message requesting comment did not immediately receive a response from the Oklahoma Attorney General’s office.
Because “any person to advise or procure an abortion for any woman” is criminalized under Oklahoma’s abortion ban, the Sooner State claims it cannot meet the demand to offer abortion counseling and referrals.
After the state rejected the government’s supposedly inadequate accommodation, which would have allowed referrals to the national hotline, the administration withdrew its offer. After that, the federal government severed ties with the state’s Title X funding.
A restriction on abortion referrals by clinics accepting Title X monies was reversed in 2021 by the Biden administration. The policy has been in a constant state of flux for years, with each president bringing new restrictions into effect; the current one, Donald Trump, imposed them in 2019.
There is still an ongoing case in the lower courts that Tennessee is attempting to pursue. In their own right, Oklahoma and ten other states are challenging the federal regulation.
Family planning, infertility support, and adolescent programs are funded in part by Oklahoma, which reportedly distributes the funds to approximately 70 local health departments. “The only access points for critical preventative services for tens or even hundreds of miles” can be government-run health facilities, particularly for rural communities, according to Oklahoma’s Supreme Court brief.
