Did SCOTUS “Side With Planned Parenthood?” (No.)

Em Carpenter

Em was one of those argumentative children who was sarcastically encouraged to become a lawyer, so she did. She is a proud life-long West Virginian, and, paradoxically, a liberal. In addition to writing about society, politics and culture, she enjoys cooking, podcasts, reading, and pretending to be a runner. She will correct your grammar. You can find her on Twitter.

Related Post Roulette

5 Responses

  1. Oscar Gordon says:

    Is there possibly a ‘better’ case in the pipe?Report

    • Em Carpenter in reply to Oscar Gordon says:

      That’s always a possibility but I’m not aware of one. Thomas suspects a case on the same issue but involving a provider that is not tied to abortion would have made it through.Report

      • Road Scholar in reply to Em Carpenter says:

        He may well be correct. But is such a case even theoretically possible? Are there any other providers beside PP that states screw around with like this?Report

        • Em Carpenter in reply to Road Scholar says:

          Most of the time though when Medicaid refuses to enroll a provider it is because they’ve been excluded, meaning they can’t participate in any government payer program- Medicaid, Medicare, or Tricare. That’s typically because of a conviction for fraudulent billing. Most others will be enrolled without issue, if properly credentialed and the paperwork is in order. But they can be disenrolled for things like not submitting renewal paperwork on time, not cooperating with records requests, or frequent denied claims.

          A bigger issue is that Medicaid is rapidly switching over to Managed Care Organizations, which are private companies like Aetna who get monthly capitation payments by the program in order to cover a segment of the Medicaid population. They are allowed to create their own “networks” of providers, which is where I could see this being an issue. The Medicaid recipients don’t get to choose whether or not they’re placed in an MCO or traditional Medicaid, so that may be an instance where the ability to sue the program for access to your preferred provider may come into play.Report

  2. Philip H says:

    There’s another possibility ( which is very different then a probability) – SCOTUS majority looked at the broad geographic range of the 5 circuits who upheld the right to sue, and decided it should be clear to the lower courts where this was headed. Thus they chose not to grant cert because circuits spread across the US had made consistent rulings, and SCOTUS is weary of settling what amount to sibling disputes that exist in part because litigants choose courts to get into circuits they think will be most favorable.

    I’m sure I’m wrong – being an oceanographer playing a lawyer and a tad undercaffeinated for a Monday – but the arena of possible explanations is very broad.Report