Planned Parenthood Defrauded Taxpayers of Millions Claims Reinstated Lawsuit

From LifeSiteNews
By James Tillman

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is reinstating Gonzalez v. Planned Parenthood of Los Angeles, a case alleging that Planned Parenthood defrauded taxpayers of tens of millions of dollars by overbilling government programs for birth-control pills and similar items.

Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), whose attorneys are handling the case, said that although "this case is by no means over, winning this appeal means we have gotten the federal claim over the threshold hurdles and can now get down to the heart of this case: the alleged fraud.”

Victor Gonzalez, a former Chief Financial Officer for Planned Parenthood of Los Angeles (PPLA), had filed his suit on Dec. 19, 2005, shortly after he was fired, allegedly for voicing concerns about PP's illegal accounting practices.

According to Gonzalez, Planned Parenthood had been billing California's Department of Health Services (DHS) at their "usual and customary" rates for oral contraceptives, rather than at the lower "acquisition cost" rates since at least 1997; this was despite the fact that the DHS had repeatedly instructed the Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California (PPAC) to seek reimbursement for drugs solely at the acquisition cost.

This means Planned Parenthood may have charged the DHS as much as 12 times the purchase price of some drugs.

An audit report issued by the California Department of Health Services (DHS) found that such overbilling by the Planned Parenthood of San Diego and Riverside Counties (PPH) cost the state over $5.2 million for the audit period.

Actual overbilling by all Planned Parenthood affiliates in California was almost certainly much higher: the audit examined only periods between 2002 and 2004 for only one of nine separately incorporated Planned Parenthood affiliates in California, each of which engaged in the practice.

According to some sources, the state may have been defrauded of more than $180 million in all.

Planned Parenthood, however, managed to use allies in the state legislature to push AB2151 into law, which permitted PP clinics to continue their practice legally. Gov. Schwarzenegger signed AB2151 on September 28, 2004.

Because the state's medical-assistance programs are supported by federal funds, however, PP's fraud fell beneath the jurisdiction of the federal False Claims Act (FCA), which forbids government contractors from submitting "false or fraudulent" claims for payment.

Furthermore, beneath the FCA, private individuals may bring suit against organizations that have defrauded the government and recover a fraction of the fraudulently obtained funds as their reward.

Attorneys representing Planned Parenthood had convinced U.S. District Court Judge Howard to dismiss Gonzalez's suit on October 30, 2008 on the grounds that he was not an "original source" as the FCA requires.

The ACLJ, a conservative legal advocacy organization focusing on Constitutional law, entered the field as the case was appealed.

"The question on appeal was whether the former PP employee is a proper whistleblower under the False Claims Act,” said Sekulow. “We contended that the answer is ‘Yes,’ and now a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit has unanimously agreed with us.”

"This is an important victory. But the legal fight is sure to continue," he continued.

Circuit Judges Alfred Goodwin, Mary Schroeder, and Raymond Fischer ordered the case reopened on July 2. The case names as defendants each of the Planned Parenthood affiliates in California, in addition to the Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, PP’s political action group that helped push for AB2151.

Planned Parenthood is well known for attempting to maximize profits through unethical means, such as by pushing profitable abortions and promoting their highly controversial "telemed" chemical abortions. According to the pro-life group Operation Rescue, Planned Parenthood routinely overbills insurance companies for such "telemed" abortions.

U.S. Court: National Day of Prayer is Unconstitutional

From LifeSiteNews
By John Jalsevac

In a decision released Thursday, U.S. District Judge Barbara B. Crabb declared the National Day of Prayer unconstitutional. The decision comes in the case filed by The Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF), a Wisconsin-based organization, which challenged the constitutionality of a 1988 federal law giving the president the authority to designate the first Thursday in May as a National Day of Prayer.

The day of prayer "goes beyond mere 'acknowledgment' of religion because its sole purpose is to encourage all citizens to engage in prayer, an inherently religious exercise that serves no secular function in this context," Crabb wrote. "In this instance, the government has taken sides on a matter that must be left to individual conscience."

The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) which represented 31 members of Congress in an amicus brief defending the National Day of Prayer, said that the decision is flawed and expressed confidence that it will be overturned.

"It is unfortunate that this court failed to understand that a day set aside for prayer for the country represents a time-honored tradition that embraces the First Amendment, not violates it," said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the ACLJ.

"This decision runs counter to well established legal precedent and we're confident that this flawed decision ultimately will be overturned.”

Sekulow said that ACLJ will be appealing the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. If the appeals court refuses to overturn the decision, Sekulow said that the ACLJ will bring it before the Supreme Court.

He said he is conficdent that the Supreme Court would “ultimately determine that such proclamations and observances like the National Day of Prayer not only reflect our nation's rich history, but are indeed consistent with the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment."

In its brief filed with the federal district court in Madison, Wisconsin, the ACLJ represented itself and 31 members of the 111th Congress – including Rep. J. Randy Forbes of Virginia, who chairs the Congressional Prayer Caucus.

The ACLJ brief noted that the country has a long history of recognizing a national day of prayer dating back to the late 1700's with the Continental Congress recommending that the states set apart a day for prayer and thanksgiving. The brief states that "the historical evidence establishing a National Day of Prayer as deeply embedded in the tradition and history of this country is indisputable."

The ACLJ represented the following U.S. Representatives who are serving in the 111th Congress: J. Randy Forbes, Robert B. Aderholt, Michele Bachmann, Roscoe G. Bartlett, John A. Boehner, John Boozman, Eric Cantor, K. Michael Conaway, Mary Fallin, Virginia Foxx, Trent Franks, Scott Garrett, Louie Gohmert, Wally Herger, Peter Hoekstra, Walter B. Jones, Jim Jordan, Doug Lamborn, Thaddeus G. McCotter, Patrick T. McHenry, Mike McIntyre, Jeff Miller, Sue Wilkins Myrick, Randy Neugebauer, Pete Olson, Mike Pence, Joseph R. Pitts, Heath Shuler, Adrian Smith, Lamar Smith, and Joe Wilson.

The ACLJ amicus brief is available here:
http://www.aclj.org/media/pdf/ACLJAmicibrief-Final.pdf