Supreme Court Could Strip Protections from Millions of Federal Program Beneficiaries

[turbinetree]

?h=4bb63ef4&itok=89SyqUZD

When public officials threaten to unlawfully deny or terminate rights guaranteed under public benefit programs (e.g., Medicare, Social Security), people are entitled under law to a review by an independent decisionmaker. For more than a half century, Medicaid beneficiaries have been able to turn to the federal courts for this protection under section 1983, a 150-year old civil rights law. On May 2, however, the Supreme Court agreed to decide whether people who depend on Medicaid and Medicaid providers should continue to have this fundamental safeguard. Because Medicaid serves a predominantly low-income population with a disproportionate number of people of color, the health equity implications of eliminating such a core legal protection are enormous.

The case in question is Health and Hospital Corp. v Talevski. Gorgi Talevski had sued a public nursing home, claiming it had violated his rights under the Federal Nursing Home Reform Act — part of Medicaid since 1987 — by unlawfully medicating and discharging him. The question the Court will consider in Talevski, however, is not the nursing home’s conduct, but rather whether his rights under Medicaid can be enforced under section 1983, which protects constitutional and statutory rights against illegal actions by state officials.

Talevski involved a claim for damages for injury. But section 1983 is overwhelmingly used to sue to stop harms before they occur, such as a threat of unlawful termination of family planning benefits required under law or total loss of eligibility by terminating coverage without due process. Courts can stop these actions; they can affirmatively order states to reinstate coverage unlawfully denied. Without access to these special judicial powers, affected beneficiaries and providers face the threat of irreparable injury. This power is unique to the courts. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees state programs, cannot order a halt to unlawful state practices or compel states to reinstate coverage wrongfully withheld.

https://www.commonwealthfund.org/blog/2022/supreme-court-could-strip-protections-millions-federal-program-beneficiaries


This case is on the fall docket ......and then there is this article......

https://www.rawstory.com/when-fdr-tried-to-pack-the-supreme-court-a-lesson-for-dark-brandon/

[Lovie777]

1. Don't ever tell me about seniors strong support for Republicans ......

shakes head here. Republicans just don't care.

[ProudMNDemocrat]

3. "I have mine. The rest of the country can go to hell in a handbasket."

The Ayn Rand philosophy that Republicans follow.

Disgusting. Nor are all Republican voters independently wealthy that something like this could never happen to them.

[paleotn]

6. Seems some Americans have this innate need to vote AGAINST their best interests....

Adams would be amazed. His fear of the mob was unwarranted. Americans will simply screw themselves because they hate (fill in the blank) and that hate can be easily harnessed by unscrupulous elites.

[Bettie]

2. WILL strip

Does anyone have any doubt that they will destroy the social safety net, on a 6-3 vote? I don't.

[Farmer-Rick]

4. Got to punish the poor

How dare they be poor and use benefits they are entitled to.

"The question the Court will consider......whether his rights under Medicaid can be enforced under section 1983, which protects constitutional and statutory rights against illegal actions by state officials."

So state officials can illegally have death panels and decide which groveling poor person is allowed medical attention.

Maybe if they get to whip and beat the poor suffering person they will allow them to use medical benefits? Sounds like something the Supremely Religious Court would go along with. Or maybe after a good stoning. Stoning is in that fiction book called the Bible right?

[paleotn]

5. It's complex, but....

is this the next step in a process where some states can opt out of Medicaid entirely? Much of the funding comes from state coffers, and you know places like TX and AL would love to stop funding it entirely. Another stage in forming, for all practical purposes, two separate Americas. One that looks like the America we all know and love. Another that looks more like Honduras.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

7. The Subversive 6 aid the oligarchs in getting richer.

[SWBTATTReg]

8. As someone who's paid into social security (SS) my entire life, and finally now am ...

old enough to finally start receiving the benefits that I've paid into the system for so long (over 40+ years), it's nice to finally get these long-awaited benefits. These people threatening my SS and other benefits are scum of the Earth. What else am I going to rely on? I use my meager savings already and am too old, and not too spry to go back into the workplace, like so many of us are. The SS is a godsend and one that I in effect, paid for already. This is not their money, it's ours.