Currently, in Nevada, Medicaid only covers abortion in the case of rape, incest or if the life of the mother is at risk. The ACLU, on behalf of the Silver State Hope Fund, filed a lawsuit on August 28 against the Nevada Department of Health and Human Services seeking to reverse the ban on Medicaid funding for abortion in the state of Nevada. The suit is based on application of the newly ratified state Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) which prohibits the denial of individual rights based on sex (one of ten classes now protected–Article 24, Nevada Constitution).
Nevada’s ERA was adopted through a process that required the legislature to consider the measure in two consecutive legislative sessions before presenting it to voters as a ballot measure. The ERA began as an emergency measure in 2019 during the last four days of the session. Democrats played hide and seek with committee hearings and the measure passed out of committees behind the bar.
The ERA was passed by the next legislature during the COVID lockdowns when citizens and lobbyists were not allowed into the legislative building. Only one hearing was held, and as it was one of the first Zoom hearings, many legal experts and advocates were unable to present their case. The Nevada legislature failed to fulfill its obligation to properly vet the amendment prior to the vote of the people. As a result, the voters approved the ERA in 2022 without sufficient notice or understanding of the unintended consequences.
During hearings concerning the ERA, the lobbyist from Nevada Right to Life was called “Chicken Little” for warning that the ERA would be used to eliminate the ban on tax payer funding of abortion. In the suit, ACLU contends, “[t]he coverage ban further entrenches inequality on the basis of capacity for pregnancy, a sex-linked characteristic.”
Apparently the sky is falling after all.
The ACLU pulls no punches in the complaint. It seeks to redefine elective abortion as “medically necessary.” The state of Nevada and Medicaid have extensive coverage of contraception and sterilization. The ACLU would like to redefine pregnancy as an illness and abortion as just another treatment or, even more chillingly, a contraception method.
Further, it appears the ACLU wishes to reduce poverty and the high number of unborn persons of color through abortion, which seemingly can only be done if the state pays to terminate these individuals. Presumably, not enough brown and black babies are killed by the state of Nevada and the ACLU asks the Court to intervene to increase those numbers. (SSHF v. NV DHHS, Writ of Mandamus, Sections 32-34).
…Nevada abortion seekers, like Nevada Medicaid recipients, are disproportionately people of color. Over 65% of abortion seekers in Nevada who reported their race and ethnicity were Black, Hispanic/Latino, Asian, Pacific Islander, other races, or multiple races, whereas approximately 28% of the Nevada population is comprised of people of color.”
I am all for medical equity, but shouldn’t we be concerned with a systemic problem that 65% of unborn babies are of color?
Maybe the ACLU is just channeling the ghost of Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood and noted eugenicist. It only took 100 years for PP to confirm what they have denounced as lies.
The complaint also engages in gender warfare:
[t]he coverage ban discriminates on the basis of sex because it is based on, and perpetuates, invidious sex-based stereotypes. This includes the stereotype that women are, by nature, destined to become mothers.” (emphasis added)
It is surprising that the ACLU chooses to use terms like women and mothers–terms they have tried to erase many other times.
It is illogical to include the action of “terminating a pregnancy” as reproductive care. The goal and end result of the procedure is to kill and remove a baby, a life. Merriam Webster defines “reproduction” as:
- The act of reproducing or the condition or process of being reproduced.
- Something reproduced, especially in the faithfulness of its resemblance to the form and elements of the original.
- The sexual or asexual process by which organisms generate new individuals of the same kind; procreation.
Abortion is anti-reproduction and/or destruction. As the ACLU states, “Medicaid’s mission is to assist in providing quality medical care for eligible individuals and families with low incomes and limited resources.”
Quality medical care never involves the willful destruction of an individual, even when that individual is a pre-born baby.
On one hand, the ACLU demands the State kill more babies. On the other hand the ACLU, Planned Parenthood, and the Democrat party at large, demand that Community Pregnancy Centers close under the boot of the state.
Community Pregnancy Centers are local people, like you and me, who provide women the medical facts, the encouragement, the resources, and the means to successfully have their baby. Note the one person absent in all of these ACLU actions – the woman, the mother, and the person in greatest stress. But, by helping her and her baby there is no profit–or shall we say in the nonprofit world–revenue.
Let’s talk about the nonprofit, the plaintiff, Silver State Hope fund.
Silver State Hope Fund is a Nevada nonprofit organization that offers grants to people with the fewest resources to pay for their abortions. They pay for the woman’s travel, lodging, and childcare to ensure that pregnant women can attend their abortion appointments.
So, why do they need Medicaid to pay?
According to the suit, the “Demand for assistance far outstrips Silver State’s resources, and Silver State is unable to fully fund all who come to them for help.”
Seems to me, Nevadans have spoken. Nevadans may not agree on abortion, but they do agree on an unwillingness to pay for someone else’s abortion. Therefore, the ACLU must now step in and demand that a court forcibly extract the dollars from the taxpayer, regardless of a taxpayer’s belief.
Lastly, it is also important to remember that Medicaid dollars are limited. Therefore, increasing the coverage of elective procedures will endanger medically necessary coverage for all.
Look, this is all logic, but as we know the other side uses emotion and stories that sell. Yet, I and many Nevadans question and challenge their story that ultimately sells the willful destruction of under-represented babies of color and disability.