Supporters of Planned Parenthood demonstrated in Seattle this summer to protest Brett Kavanaugh's nomination to the Supreme Court. (Photo: Ted S. Warren, AP) 
 
 WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court refused Monday to consider efforts by Republican-led states to defund Planned Parenthood. 
 
 Despite its new, more conservative tilt, the court let stand federal appeals court rulings that allowed the reproductive health organization's patients to contest laws in Louisiana and Kansas that stripped its Medicaid funds. 
 
 The court’s refusal to hear the case represents a setback for conservative interest groups in many states that have sought aggressive action against Planned Parenthood and abortion providers in general. 
 
 Three of the court's conservatives – Associate Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch – dissented and said the court should have taken up the issue. Chief Justice John Roberts and new Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh did not join the dissent. 
 
 ► Dec. 10: Only abortion provider left in Tennessee capital suspends its services 
 
 ► Oct. 25: Abortion cases offer test for the Supreme Court 
 
 "What explains the court’s refusal to do its job here?" Thomas wrote. "I suspect it has something to do with the fact that some respondents in these cases are named 'Planned Parenthood.' That makes the court’s decision particularly troubling, as the question presented has nothing to do with abortion. 
 
 "Some tenuous connection to a politically fraught issue does not justify abdicating our judicial duty," he said. "If anything, neutrally applying the law is all the more important when political issues are in the background." 
 
 Similar defunding efforts have been blocked in Arizona and Indiana and are being contested in Ohio and Texas. Only in Arkansas has a federal court allowed the state to deny funds. 
 
 The laws were passed by state legislatures opposed to Planned Parenthood's provision of abortions. Abortions already were denied federal Medicaid funds. The laws blocked funding for other services, from contraception to cancer screenings. 
 
 The federal Medicaid Act allows patients to seek out any qualified provider – the key word being "qualified." Louisiana and Kansas sought to block Planned Parenthood's funding based on a variety of allegations, including disputed claims that the group sold fetal tissue and body parts for profit. 
 
 ► Oct. 24: Federal court says undocumented teen can get abortion 
 
 ► Aug. 19: Brett Kavanaugh could make difference on abortion, race, gay rights 
 
 Opponents of abortion rights expressed disappointment at the high court's inaction but noted that other cases are percolating in lower courts that could give the justices another chance. 
 
 Catherine Glenn Foster, president of Americans United for Life, said the group "will continue to fight to protect states from being forced to use their limited public funds to subsidize abortion businesses.” 
 
 Dr. Leana Wen, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, hailed the court's decision to leave lower court rulings alone. 
 
 “As a doctor, I have seen what’s at stake when people cannot access the care they need and when politics gets in the way of people making their own health care choices," Wen said. 
 
 The Supreme Court has upheld abortion rights in a series of decisions dating back to 1973. Its most recent ruling struck down restrictions on abortion clinics and providers in Texas two years ago. 
 
 Planned Parenthood is the nation's largest provider of abortions. More than 2 million women use its clinics for a variety of reproductive services, including many on Medicaid. More than 70 million people – 1 in 5 Americans – are enrolled in Medicaid. 
 
 Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/12/10/defunding-planned-parenthood-supreme-court-wont-hear-case/1777972002/ ||||| The Supreme Court passed on cases asking whether patients can sue states for excluding Planned Parenthood from state Medicaid funding. | Zach Gibson/Getty Images legal Kavanaugh, Roberts side with liberal judges on Planned Parenthood case 
 
 The Supreme Court on Monday declined to review whether states can block Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers from their Medicaid programs, passing on a pair of cases that would have served as the first major abortion test for the court’s new conservative majority. 
 
 Chief Justice John Roberts and the newest justice, Brett Kavanaugh, joined the court's four liberal jurists in turning away a pair of petitions from Kansas and Louisiana seeking the ban on abortion providers. 
 
 Story Continued Below 
 
 Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch, dissented. It takes four justices to agree to accept a case. 
 
 Thomas, suggesting most of his colleagues were fearful of taking up a challenge involving Planned Parenthood, asserted the cases weren't about abortion rights but whether individuals have a right to challenge a state’s decision to cut a particular provider from its Medicaid program. 
 
 COUNTDOWN TO 2020 The race for 2020 starts now. Stay in the know. Follow our presidential election coverage. Email Sign Up By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time. 
 
 “Some tenuous connection to a politically fraught issue does not justify abdicating our judicial duty," Thomas wrote. "If anything, neutrally applying the law is all the more important when political issues are in the background." 
 
 One federal appeals court previously ruled that Medicaid enrollees can't sue their states for blocking funding to Planned Parenthood. Monday's action by the Supreme Court doesn't affect that decision for states in that federal circuit. 
 
 States have tried to defund Planned Parenthood since a series of undercover videos in 2015 purported to show the women's health organization profiting off the sale of tissue from abortions. A series of investigations found no evidence of wrongdoing by Planned Parenthood, which has forcefully denied the claims made by anti-abortion activists behind the videos. 
 
 Justices had twice earlier this year declined to act on petitions in Andersen v. Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri and Gee v. Planned Parenthood of Gulf Coast. The decision to refuse the cases came after Kavanaugh was confirmed as the ninth justice with strong support from anti-abortion activists. 
 
 Tim Jost, an emeritus professor at Washington and Lee University School of Law, said it's "noteworthy" that Kavanaugh passed on the cases. 
 
 "If Kavanaugh was going to deal a major blow to health care rights during his first session on the court, this would have been the case to do it," Jost said. 
 
 The anti-abortion group Susan B. Anthony List said it was "disappointed" the Supreme Court declined the case, as it called on the Trump administration to quickly finalize rules blocking federal funds to Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers through the Title X family planning program. 
 
 “The pro-life citizens of states like Kansas and Louisiana, through their elected representatives, have clearly expressed their will: they do not want Medicaid tax dollars used to prop up abortion businesses like Planned Parenthood," said SBA List president Marjorie Dannenfelser in a statement. 
 
 For decades, no federal dollars have gone to fund abortions, but there have been many legal battles over whether providers like Planned Parenthood that offer a wide range of health services in addition to abortion are entitled to some amount of public health care funding. 
 
 Defunding Planned Parenthood has been a priority of the GOP base, and anti-abortion groups have been frustrated that a Republican-controlled Congress and administration have so far been unable to do so. Kavanaugh's elevation to the Supreme Court in October following the retirement of Justice Anthony Kennedy, a crucial swing vote on abortion cases, was thought to have delivered the five votes needed to back the states. 
 
 “We are pleased that lower court rulings protecting patients remain in place," Planned Parenthood Federation of America President Leana Wen said in a statement. "Every person has a fundamental right to health care, no matter who they are, where they live, or how much they earn." 
 
 The cases in Kansas and Louisiana, filed earlier this year, ask whether patients can sue states for excluding Planned Parenthood from state Medicaid funding. 
 
 In February, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court ruling that Kansas was wrong to to end Planned Parenthood’s Medicaid funding, writing that states can’t cut off funding for reasons “unrelated to the provider’s competence and the quality of the healthcare it provides.” Four other appeals courts have ruled that Medicaid patients have the right to access the provider of their choice. 
 
 But the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has held that states do have the right to terminate a provider’s Medicaid contract and that residents cannot challenge that decision. 
 
 The Supreme Court's action Monday allows the split decisions to stand in different federal circuits. Thomas, in his dissent, wrote that the Supreme Court should have taken the cases to resolve conflicting findings from lower courts. 
 
 "Because of this Court’s inaction, patients in different States — even patients with the same providers — have different rights to challenge their State’s provider decisions," Thomas wrote. 
 
 Jost, the retired law professor, said the split rulings mean Medicaid enrollees in the 8th Circuit can't challenge a decision by their state to terminate Planned Parenthood from Medicaid. States in the circuit include Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota. 
 
 "But presumably in the rest of the country, Medicaid beneficiaries still have access to Planned Parenthood," Jost said. ||||| Supreme Court Ducks Effort To Defund Planned Parenthood 
 
 Enlarge this image toggle caption Nikki Kahn/The Washington Post/Getty Images Nikki Kahn/The Washington Post/Getty Images 
 
 Updated at 2:42 p.m. ET 
 
 The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear a case brought by Republican-led states that were seeking to defund Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood and other organizations that provide women's reproductive health services. 
 
 The case does not involve federal money for abortion-related services. That is barred by federal law. Rather, it involves an effort by two states to block Medicaid funding for some abortion providers that, like Planned Parenthood, get Medicaid funding for providing other services to low-income women, services like cancer screenings, prenatal services, birth control and ultrasounds. 
 
 Three conservative justices — Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Samuel Alito — dissented and would have heard the challenges brought by Kansas and Louisiana. 
 
 But notably, two other conservatives, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh, did not. They were joined by the court's four liberals. 
 
 The court's decision not to decide strongly suggests that a majority of justices, led by Roberts, would like to keep a low profile this term. In the aftermath of the explosive and divisive Kavanaugh confirmation hearings this fall, and with two new justices on the court in less than a year, Roberts and most of the other justices have gone out of their way to paint the court as a nonpartisan, apolitical institution. 
 
 "It's an incredibly important thing for the court to guard — is this reputation of being fair, of being impartial, of being neutral, and not being simply an extension of the terribly polarized political process and environment that we live in," Justice Elena Kagan said in October. 
 
 And last month, Chief Justice Roberts issued an extraordinary rebuke of President Trump for angry remarks that dismissed a lower court decision by an "Obama Judge" as a "disgrace." 
 
 Roberts then issued a statement declaring, "We do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges. What we have is an extraordinary group of dedicated judges doing their level best to do equal right to those appearing before them. That independent judiciary is something we should all be thankful for." 
 
 The justices' decision to stay out of the Medicaid issue goes back to discredited videos purporting to show Planned Parenthood officials inappropriately looking to sell fetal parts. Despite evidence showing the videos had been edited, some states then enacted laws that removed Planned Parenthood from their list of qualified Medicaid providers for other women's health services. 
 
 Planned Parenthood, which says that only 3 percent of the services it provides are abortions, then sued, along with other similarly affected organizations. 
 
 NPR's Danielle Kurtzleben reported in 2015: 
 
 "[T]his 3 percent statistic has many critics, who point out, for example, that it doesn't explain how much of Planned Parenthood's revenue comes from abortion. Others note that the figure counts services provided, not patients served — and some patients receive more than one service from the organization. That means more than 3 percent of patients receive abortions (PolitiFact [that] week estimated the figure at around 12 percent, for example)." 
 
 Planned Parenthood contended in this case the states were singling them out for disfavored treatment because they separately provide constitutionally protected abortion services. 
 
 The court's decision Monday to stay out of the issue for now leaves in place a conflict in lower court decisions. It lets stand decisions in five federal appeals courts that have ruled in favor of Planned Parenthood and other women's health service providers, and one appeals court that has ruled the other way. 
 
 Six remaining circuits — most of them in geographical areas dominated by Democrats — have not ruled on the issue; presumably most, if not all of, the states in those circuits have not enacted a ban on Medicaid funding for women's health service providers if those organizations also provide separate and privately funded abortion services. 
 
 Some 70 million Americans are on Medicaid, Justice Thomas observed in his dissent. The court, he said, should have heard the case and resolved the legal conflict. 
 
 "So what explains the court's refusal to do its job here?" Thomas asked in the written dissent joined by Gorsuch and Alito. "I suspect that some" of those health service providers challenging their removal "are named Planned Parenthood." 
 
 But, he added, "some tenuous connection to a politically fraught issue does not justify abdicating our judicial duty." 
 
 Leana Wen, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, praised the decision in a statement: 
 
 "We are pleased that lower court rulings protecting patients remain in place. Every person has a fundamental right to health care, no matter who they are, where they live, or how much they earn. As a doctor, I have seen what's at stake when people cannot access the care they need, and when politics gets in the way of people making their own health care choices. We won't stop fighting for every patient who relies on Planned Parenthood for life-saving, life-changing care." 
 
 Students for Life of America, an anti-abortion-rights group, focused on Planned Parenthood's role in abortions, though, again, Medicaid funds cannot be used to fund abortions. SFLA's Kristan Hawkin said in a statement of her own: 
 
 "Taxation without representation lives on today in a decision by a majority on the court that ignores the wishes of state leaders who no longer want to be coerced into funding abortion. Abortion is not healthcare, and women's needs are better met by real, full-service medical locations, not abortion vendors. This is a legitimate question and a missed opportunity — whether abortion vendors have a right to taxpayer monies." 
 
 NPR's William Conlon and Sarah McCammon contributed to this report. ||||| Washington (CNN) The Supreme Court Monday rebuffed efforts by states to block funding to Planned Parenthood. 
 
 It left in place two lower court opinions that said that states violate federal law when they terminate Medicaid contracts with Planned Parenthood affiliates who offer preventive care for low income women. 
 
 It would have taken four justices to agree to hear the issue, and only three conservative justices -- Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch -- voted to hear the case. 
 
 Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh appeared to side with the court's liberals in not taking up the case -- showing an effort to avoid high-profile abortion-related issues for now. 
 
 Roberts and Kavanaugh "likely have serious objections," said Steve Vladeck, CNN Supreme Court analyst and professor at the University of Texas School of Law. "But such votes seem to be a signal that they would rather avoid contentious, high-profile disputes for now, at least where possible." 
 
 Read More
– Planned Parenthood got some good news from the Supreme Court on Monday, as new Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined the court's more liberal judges—as did Chief Justice John Roberts—in deciding not to hear a case involving the group. The upshot is that state court rulings will remain in place; those rulings allow Planned Parenthood to contest laws in Louisiana and Kansas to defund the organization. If either Kavanaugh or Roberts had joined conservative justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch, the court would have taken up the case, turning it into the first major abortion test of the new court, reports Politico. Lawmakers in the two states sought to deny public funding to Planned Parenthood because the group provides abortions. However, federal law already prohibits Medicaid funds from being used for abortions, notes NPR. In his dissent, Thomas blasted the decision. "What explains the Court's refusal to do its job here?" he wrote. "I suspect it has something to do with the fact that some respondents in these cases are named Planned Parenthood." He contended that the cases at hand "are not about abortion rights" but "about private rights of action under the Medicaid Act," per CNN. Still, USA Today sees the court's move as a setback for conservative interest groups who have been pushing for action on Planned Parenthood over the issue of abortion. (Abortion rights groups won a reprieve in Iowa earlier this year.)