On Monday, just hours after Planned Parenthood filed suit against the Trump administration over a key provision in the newly enacted “Big Beautiful Bill,” a federal judge in Massachusetts issued an order temporarily blocking its enforcement. The provision in question would have suspended Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood for one year.
U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani, an Obama appointee, granted Planned Parenthood’s emergency request, issuing a two-week restraining order that halts the administration’s ability to enforce the measure. In her ruling, Talwani barred federal officials and their agents from enforcing, retroactively applying, or otherwise implementing the defunding clause against Planned Parenthood.
“Defendants shall take all steps necessary to ensure that Medicaid funding continues to be disbursed in the customary manner,” the order reads.
I understand this is a TRO and not a final decision of legality, but it’s still crazy.
— Bonchie (@bonchieredstate) July 8, 2025
While the ruling leaves room for the administration to apply the provision against other providers, Planned Parenthood asserts it represents the vast majority of the affected entities. According to The Hill, the organization believes the block renders the provision largely inoperative in the short term.
The court’s intervention comes amid escalating political and legal battles over federal abortion policy. According to Planned Parenthood’s most recent annual report, the organization performed 392,715 abortions during the 2021–2022 fiscal year — a 5% increase from the year prior. The report also noted a 700% surge in demand at clinics in states where abortion remains legal, following the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. Additionally, Planned Parenthood facilitated abortion-related travel for more than 33,000 individuals in that same period.
The restraining order marks a temporary setback for the Trump administration, which included the defunding measure as part of its broader legislative push to shift federal priorities away from abortion providers. The administration has argued the provision is consistent with long-standing conservative efforts to prevent taxpayer dollars from indirectly subsidizing abortion services.
However, the legal landscape remains complicated. In late June, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that lower courts do not have unrestricted authority to block presidential actions, emphasizing the need for courts to operate within powers delegated by Congress. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, writing for the majority, affirmed that federal courts “do not exercise general oversight of the Executive Branch; they resolve cases and controversies consistent with the authority Congress has given them.”
