Legal Opinion
California by and through Becerra v. Azar
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided June 20, 2019No. 19-15974; No. 19-15979; No. 19-35386; No. 19-35394PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Per curiam
*1073BACKGROUND
In 1970, Congress enacted Title X of the Public Health Service Act ("Title X") to create a limited grant program for certain types of pre-pregnancy family planning services. See Pub. L. No. 91-572, 84 Stat. 1504 (1970). Section 1008 of Title X, which has remained unchanged since its enactment, is titled "Prohibition of Abortion," and provides:
None of the funds appropriated under this subchapter shall be used in programs where abortion is a method of family planning.
42 U.S.C. § 300a-6.
In 1988, the Department of Health and Human Services ("HHS") explained that it "interpreted [§] 1008…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Assn. of United States, Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Automobile Ins. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Nken v. HolderSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Koon v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Rust v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- State of California v. Alex Azar, IICourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2020
- FAMILY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF MAINE v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICESDistrict Court, D. Maine · 2020
- Mayor and City Council Of Baltimore v. AzarDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2020
- Mayor and City Council Of Baltimore v. AzarDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2019
- Vita Nuova Inc. v. Azar IIDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · 2020