On the other hand, many individuals opposed the defunding by claiming that the government expenditures are beneficial and that without Planned Parenthood the less fortunate, or many other women, would be unable to receive quality health care ("The Economic Case for Planned Parenthood"). .
In the court case Roe vs. Wade (1973), the U.S. Supreme Court held overly restrictive state regulation of abortion to be unconstitutional. This resulted in de facto legalization of abortion through all nine months of pregnancy in the entire United States. In a 7–2 vote the Supreme Court held that a set of Texas statutes criminalized abortion in most circumstances and was a violation of woman's constitutional right of privacy. The court found this violation implied in the liberty guarantee of the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment ("Planned Parenthood V. Casey").
In the court cased Planned Parenthood vs. Casey (1992), the Court restated what it considered as the "essential" holding of Roe vs. Wade, consisting of three parts: First, a woman has the right . . . . to choose to have an abortion before viability and to obtain it without unwanted interference from the State. Before practicality, the State's interests are not strong enough to support an exclusion of abortion or the obligation of a significant obstacle to the woman's effective right to decide to go through with the abortion procedure. Second, the State has the power to restrict abortions after fetal viability, if the law encloses exceptions for pregnancies which could place the woman's life or health in danger. Lastly, the State has sincere interests from the beginning of the pregnancy in shielding the health of the woman and the life of the fetus that may become a child. ("Planned Parenthood V. Casey"). .
Individuals such as Michael New (2015), believe that "no funding for Planned Parenthood would be no problem.
