THE U.S. SUPREME COURT CASE ON ENFORCING THE FEDERAL NURSING HOME REFORM ACT
Supreme Court Merits Briefing
Health and Hospital Corp. of Marion County v. Talevski, No. 21-806
MONDAY, MAY 2, 2022
CERTIORARI GRANTED
21-806 HEALTH AND HOSPITAL CORP., ET AL. V. TALEVSKI, GORGI
The motion to substitute Ivanka Talevski, as authorized
representative, as respondent in place of Gorgi Talevski,
Deceased is granted. The petition for a writ of
certiorari is granted.
Parties’ scheduling letter, May 5, 2022
20220505134256143_2022-05-05 Letter Motion for Extension
Petitioners’ brief – 7/18/2022
Respondent’s brief – 9/16/2022
Petitioners’ reply brief – 10/17/2022
| May 24 2022 | Motion to extend the time to file the briefs on the merits granted. The time to file the joint appendix and petitioners’ brief on the merits is extended to and including July 18, 2022. The time to file respondent’s brief on the merits is extended to and including September 16, 2022. |
Petitioners’ brief, July 18, 2022
20220718175856195_2022-07-18 Final Brief HHC v. Talevski PDF-A
National Conference of State Legislatures amicus, July 25, 2022
20220725101949196_21-806 tsac StateAndLocalGovernmentOrgs
South Carolina Medicaid director amicus, July 25, 2022
20220725115812248_21-806 Amicus Brief of Robert M Kerr
American Health Care Ass’n amicus, July 25, 2022
20220725132823708_21-806-tsac-AHCA et al
Indiana et al amicus, July 25, 2022
20220725151159424_21-806 – tsac Indiana and 21 Other States
Eloise Pasachoff, Federal Grant Rules and Realities in the Intergovernmental Administrative State:
Compliance, Performance, and Politics, 37 Yale Journal of Regulation 573 (2020) (cited in Indiana amicus)
Pasachoff_Article._Publication__1_
Eloise Pasachoff, Agency Enforcement of Spending Clause Statutes: A Defense of the
Funding Cut-Off, 124 YALE L.J. 248 (2014)
U.S. amicus, July 25, 2022
20220725195544307_21-806 – US Amicus Br – Talevski FINAL
Indiana motion to participate in oral argument, September 9, 2022
20220909115813636_Motion for Divided Argument
US motion to participate in oral argument, September 9, 2022
20220909165608463_21-806 Talevski US Divided Argument Motion-3
Talevski’s brief, September 16, 2022
20220916160554873_Talevski Brief and App – 21-806
Pennsylvania Ass’n for Justice amicus, and appendix, September 19, 2022
20220919161905513_RFD Appendix
Public Citizen amicus, September 22, 2022
20220922135951214_21-806 bsac Public Citizen
American Public Health Ass’n amicus, September 22, 2022
20220922160145225_21-806 APHA ACPM Deans Chairs Scholars Amicus Brief
Members of Congress amicus, September 23, 2022
20220923085513898_21-806_Amicus Brief
Institute for Justice amicus, September 23, 2022
20220923085926238_21-806 Amicus Brief of Institute for Justice
Retired Lawyers amicus, September 23, 2022
20220923095235114_talevski.21-806.amicus .brf
Constitutional Accountability Center amicus, September 23, 2022
20220923105007287_Health and Hospital Amicus Brief FINAL
AARP amicus, September 23, 2022
20220923113017947_21-806 Amici Brief AARP Final
American Cancer Society amicus, September 23, 2022
20220923121704810_21-806bsacTheAmericanCancerSocietyActionNetwork
Indiana Disability Rights amicus, September 23, 2022
20220923122416454_21-806bsacIndianaDisabilityRights
California Medical Ass’n amicus, September 23, 2022
20220923123819015_Talevski Amicus No. 21-806
National Health Law Program amicus, September 23, 2022
20220923124840282_21-806 bsac NHELP
National Center for Youth Law amicus, September 23, 2022
20220923150027996_Youth Organizations Amicus
Former Members of Congress amicus, September 23, 2022
20220923151105777_21-806 Amicus Brief
[cited in Former Members of Congress amicus] H.R. Conf. Rep. 101-922 at 343 [?] (1990), reprinted in 1990 U.S. Code Cong. & Ad. News
[cited in Former Members of Congress amicus] H.R. Conf. Rep. 103-480 at 60 [?] (1994), reprinted in 1994 U.S. Code Cong. & Ad. News
Hatcher amicus, September 23, 2022
20220923151920034_21-806 Health and Hospital v Talevski Amicus Curiae Brief in Support of Respondent
Health Policy Scholars amicus, September 23, 2022
20220923152334274_21-806bsacHealthPolicyScholars
Georgia Advocacy Office amicus, September 23, 2022
20220923152454826_21-806 bsac Georgia Advocacy Office
Edelman amicus, September 23, 2022
20220923152036326_No. 21-806_Amicus Brief
Statutory interpretation scholars amicus, September 23, 2022
20220923153924074_2022.09.23 Talevski Brief of Statutory Interpretation Scholars
Children’s Health Care Providers amicus, September 23, 2022
20220923154153513_TALEVSKI 21-806 Amicus Brief – Final
Bazelon Center amicus, September 23, 2022
20220923153930681_Bazelon et al. amicus brief – Health Hosp. v. Talevski – No. 21-806
Former Senior HHS Officials amicus, September 23, 2022
Contract Law Professors amicus, September 23, 2022
20220923160434438_21-806 bsacContractLawAndLegalHistoryProfessors
Nat’l Ass’n of Community Health Centers amicus, September 23, 2022
20220923162900897_21-806 Amici Brief
Indiana Trial Lawyers amicus, September 23, 2022
20220923173130110_21-806_Amicus Brief
Petitioners’ reply, October 17, 2022
20221017144551803_21-806 Brief
Transcript of oral argument, November 8, 2022
==
Northern Indiana and Seventh Circuit nursing home case, and cert paperwork
Talevski v. Health and Hospital Corp. of Marion County, No. 2:19-cv-13 (N.D. Ind., March 26, 2020)
Seventh Circuit No. 20-1664
Opening brief, July 31, 2020
AARP amicus, August 7, 2020
NHeLP amicus, August 7, 2020
Law Professors amicus, August 7, 2020
Appellee brief, September 29, 2020
States’ amicus, October 6, 2020
Indiana HCA amicus, October 6, 2020
Talevski reply brief, November 3, 2020
Seventh Circuit opinion, July 27, 2021
Petition for rehearing, August 10, 2021
Order denying rehearing, August 25, 2021
21-806
Cert petition, November 23, 2021
20211123155211479_HHC Petition and Appendix FINAL for E FILIING
Waiver of right to respond, December 20, 2021
| Dec 29 2021 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/14/2022. |
Indiana amicus, January 3, 2022
20220103152719396_21-806 tsac Health and Hospital Corporation of Marion County
American Health Care Ass’n amicus, January 3, 2022
20220103152736976_21-806-tsac-pet.-stage-AHCA-InHCA.pdf
| Jan 10 2022 | Response Requested. (Due February 9, 2022) |
Cert opposition, March 11, 2022
20220311113635645_42201 Tutt Talevski Brief in Opposition
Cert reply, March 25, 2022
20220325121652470_2022-03-25 Final Reply in Support of Cert for E-Filing
| Mar 29 2022 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/14/2022. |
| Apr 12 2022 | Rescheduled. |
| Apr 18 2022 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/22/2022. |
| Apr 25 2022 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/29/2022. |
MONDAY, MAY 2, 2022
CERTIORARI GRANTED
21-806 HEALTH AND HOSPITAL CORP., ET AL. V. TALEVSKI, GORGI
The motion to substitute Ivanka Talevski, as authorized
representative, as respondent in place of Gorgi Talevski,
Deceased is granted. The petition for a writ of
certiorari is granted.
====
Steward v. Abbott materials
US statement of interest
Steward US statement of interest
US opposition to motion to dismiss
Order partly denying motion to dismiss
===
General Materials: cases
Smith v. King, 277 F.Supp. 31 (M.D. Ala. 1967)
King v. Smith, appellants’ brief, March 7, 1968
King v. Smith, appellees’ brief, April 6, 1968
King v Smith appellee br 4 6 68
King v. Smith, NAACP Inc Fund amicus brief, April 6, 1968
King v Smith inc fund amicus 4 6 68
King v. Smith, appellants’ reply brief, April 18, 1968
King v Smith appellant reply br 4 18 68
King v. Smith, 392 U.S. 309 (1968)
Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (1970)
Petitioners’ brief in Rosado v. Wyman
Respondents’ brief in Rosado v. Wyman
Transcript of oral argument in Rosado v. Wyman
Rosado v. Wyman, 397 U.S. 397 (1970)
Rosado v Wyman-1
Townsend v. Swank, 404 U.S. 282 (1971)
Jefferson v. Hackney, 406 U.S. 535 (1972)
Hagans v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 528 (1974)
Edelman v. Jordan, 415 U.S. 651 (1974)
Chapman v. Houston Welfare Rights Organization, 441 U.S. 600 (1979)
Chapman v Houston Welfare Rights Organization
Caldwell v. Blum, 621 F.2d 491 (2d Cir. 1980)
Blum v. Caldwell, 446 U.S. 1311 (1980) (Marshall, J.)
Maine v. Thiboutot, 448 U.S. 1 (1980)
Thiboutot oral argument, April 22, 1980
Маіnе v. Тhіbоutоt – Оrаl Аrgumеnt – Арrіl 22, 1980 (Раrt 2)
Pennhurst State School & Hospital v. Halderman, 451 U.S. 1 (1981)
Pennhurst State School and Hospital v Halderman
Wright v. City of Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority, 479 U.S. 418 (1987)
Wright v City of Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority
Will v. Michigan Dep’t of State Police, 491 U.S. 58 (1990)
Baliles/Wilder US amicus brief
Gerald L BALILES et al Petitioners v THE VIRGINIA HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION
Wilder oral argument
Wilder v. Virginia Hospital Association, 496 U.S. 498 (1990)
Wilder v Virginia Hosp Assn
Artist M US amicus brief
Sue SUTER et al Petitioners v ARTIST M et al
Artist M oral argument
Suter v. Artist M., 503 U.S. 347 (1992)
Suter v Artist M
Blessing v. Freestone, 520 U.S. 329 (1997)
Blessing v Freestone
Blessing oral argument transcript, Jan. 6, 1997
Council of State Governments amicus in Blessing, July 26, 1996
Blessing v Freestone Council State Governments amicus
US amicus brief in Blessing, October 17, 1996
Blessing v Freestone US amicus br
Barnes v. Gorman, 536 U.S. 181 (2002)
Gonzaga University v. Doe, 536 U.S. 273 (2002)
Gonzaga University v Doe
US amicus brief in Gonzaga, February 22, 2002
Gonzaga University v Doe US amicus br
Phrma v Walsh, 538 U.S. 644 (2003)
Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America v. Walsh copy copy
Sanchez v. Johnson, 416 F.3d 1051 (9th Cir. 2005)
SANCHEZ v JOHNSON
VOPA v. Stewart, 563 U.S. 247 (2011)
Virginia Office for Protection and Advocacy v Stewart.doc
US amicus brief in VOPA, August 31, 2010
Virginia Office for Protection and Advocacy v Stewart US amicus brief
US amicus brief in Douglas v. Independent Living Center, May 26, 2011
Douglas v Independent Living Center of Southern California Inc US amicus br
Douglas v. Independent Living Center, 565 U.S. 606 (2012)
Douglas v Independent Living Center of Southern California Inc(3).doc
NFIB v. Sebelius, 567 U.S. 519 (2012)
National-Federation-of-Independent-Business-v-Sebelius
US amicus brief in Armstrong, November 24, 2014
Armstrong v Exceptional Child Center Inc US amicus br
NHeLP brief in Armstrong, December 2014
14-15 bsac Brief of Amici Curiae National Health Law Program
Armstrong v. Exceptional Child Center, No. 14-15, transcript of oral argument (January 20, 2015)
14-15oat
Armstrong v. Exceptional Child Center, No. 14-15, 135 S.Ct. 1378 (March 31, 2015)
Armstrong v Exceptional Child Center Inc
Petitioners’ merits brief in Gallardo v. Marstiller, No. 20-1263 (Sept. 15, 2021)
20210915155722541_Merits Brief
US amicus brief in Gallardo v. Marstiller, No. 20-1263 (Sept. 22, 2021)
20210922191708053_20-1263tsacUnitedStates-1
Florida’s brief in Gallardo v. Marstiller, No. 1263 ()
20211115152236251_Final brief to printer revised after proof-1
Utah amicus brief in Gallardo v. Marstiller, No. 20-1263 (Nov. 22, 2021)
20211122145115235_Gallardo Amicus 11 22 2021 penultimate
Petitioners’ reply brief, Gallardo v. Marstiller, No. 20-1263 (Dec. 15, 2021)
20211215145219680_Gallardo – Reply Brief
Oral argument transcript, Gallardo v. Marstiller, No. 20-1263 (Jan. 10, 2022)
Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller, No. 20-219 (U.S., April 28, 2022)
Gallardo v. Marstiller, No. 20-1263 (U.S., June 6, 2022)
Oral argument transcript in Wilkins, No. 21-1164 (Nov. 30, 2022)
Wilkins briefing
| Aug 04 2022 | Brief of petitioners Larry Steven Wilkins, et al. filed. |
| Main DocumentCertificate of Word CountProof of Service | |
| Aug 04 2022 | Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed) |
| Main DocumentProof of Service | |
| Aug 11 2022 | Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by National Federation of Independent Business Small Business Legal Center, et al. |
| Main DocumentProof of ServiceCertificate of Word Count | |
| Aug 11 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Local Government Organizations filed. |
| Main DocumentCertificate of Word CountProof of Service | |
| Sep 20 2022 | Brief of respondent United States filed. |
| Main DocumentProof of Service | |
| Oct 03 2022 | Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by National Federation of Independent Business Small Business Legal Center, et al. GRANTED. |
| Oct 18 2022 | SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, November 30, 2022. |
| Oct 20 2022 | Reply of petitioners Larry Steven Wilkins, et al. filed. |
| Main DocumentCertificate of Word CountProof of Service |
+++
The Westside Mothers cases
Westside Mothers v. Haveman, 133 F.Supp.2d 549 (E.D. Mich. 2001)
Westside Mothers v Haveman 2001
Westside Mothers v. Haveman, 289 F.3d 852 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1045 (2002)
Westside Mothers v Haveman 2002
Haveman cert petition
James K HAVEMAN Jr Director of the State of Michigan Department of Community Health Petitioner v Wes
Westside Mothers cert opposition
James K HAVEMAN Jr Director Michigan Department of Community Health Petitioner v Westside MOTHERS a
US cert opposition
Westside Mothers v. Olszewski, 368 F.Supp.2d 740 (E.D. Mich. 2005)
Westside Mothers v Olszewski 2005
Westside Mothers v. Olszewski, 454 F.3d 532 (6th Cir. 2006)
Westside Mothers v Olszewski 2006
Payment program holding abrogated by statute, see, e.g., A H R v. Washington State Health Care Authority, 469 F.Supp.3d 1018, 1040-41 (W.D. Wash. 2016)
A H R v Washington State Health Care Authority 2016
+++
Memo from John Roberts to Steve Brogan, August 9, 1982
Roberts memo on Maine v. Thiboutot 8 9 82
First Nat’l Bank of Omaha v. Marquette Nat’l Bank of Minneapolis, 636 F.2d 195 (8th Cir. 1980), cert. denied, cited in Roberts memo
First Nat Bank of Omaha v Marquette Nat Bank of Minneapolis
===
General Materials: the Artist M fix
42 U.S.C. sec. 1320a-2
42 U.S.C. sec. 1320a-2
42 U.S.C. sec. 1320a-10
42 U.S.C. sec. 1320a-10
LH:
LH, H. Conf. Rep. No. 103-761 (1994) at 926, reprinted in 1994 USCCAN 2901, 3257.
multiethnic placement
H.R. Rep. No. 102-631 (Ways & Means) at 364-67. Revenue Act of 1992; 1992 CIS H783-13, 5 fiches, page 1 (cover, fiche 1) plus pages 364-67 (fiche 4)
H.R. Rep. No. 102-631
Mason v. Bradley, 789 F.Supp. 273 (N.D. Ill. 1992) (cited in H.R. Rep. No. 102-631)
138 Cong. Rec. 34090 (Oct. 8, 1992) (Sen. Riegle)
138 Cong. Rec. 34090
139 Cong. Rec. 5571 introducing S. 620 (March 18, 1993) (Sen. Riegle)
139 Cong. Rec. 5571
===
Other materials
Sheppard-Towner, Act of Nov. 23, 1921, see pp. 73-75
Hill-Burton, Pub. L. 79-725 (1946)
Reich, The New Property, 73 Yale Law Journal 733 (1964)
[1966 version]
Reich, Individual Rights and Social Welfare: The Emerging Legal Issues, 74 Yale Law Journal 1245 (1965)
Cover, Federal Judicial Review of State Welfare Practices, 67 Columbia L. Rev. 84 (1967)
Federal Judicial Review of State Welfare Practices-1
NWRO v. Finch, 429 F.2d 725 (D.C. Cir. 1970)
The National Welfare Rights Organization et al
Connecticut DPW v. HEW, 448 F.2d 209 (2d Cir. 1971)
Connecticut State Dept of Public Welfare v Department of Health Ed and Welfare Social and Rehabilita
Arizona DPW v. HEW, 449 F.2d 456 (9th Cir. 1971)
Arizona State Dept of Public Welfare v Department of Health Ed and Welfare.rtf
Arizona State Dept of Public Welfare v Department of Health Ed and Welfare-1
Almenares v. Wyman, 453 F.2d 1075 (2d Cir. 1971)
Almenares v Wyman-1
Tomlinson and Mashaw, Enforcement of Federal Standards in Grant-in-Aid Programs: Suggestions for Beneficiary Involvement,58 Virginia Law Review 600 (1972)
Enforcement of Federal Standards in Federal Grant-in Aid Programs
Perkins, Pin the Tail on the Donkey, 9 St. Louis Univ. Journal of Health Law & Policy 207 (2016)
jane_perkins-article-1-1
CMS, “Medicaid Program; Methods for Assuring Access to Covered Medicaid Services—Exemptions for States With High Managed Care Penetration Rates and Rate Reduction Threshold,” 83 Fed. Reg. 12696 (March 23, 2018).
2018-05898
===
US cert opposition in Westside Mothers
===
1976: comparing FERPA with Social Security Act cooperative-federalism programs
Katherine Cudlipp, “The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act Two Years Later,” 11 University of Richmond Law Review 33 (1976), at 45-46; also printed in slightly different form at 122 Cong. Rec. 16447-16451 at 16449-50 (June 3, 1976) (remarks of Sen. Buckley).
The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act Two Years Later-1
In an important case61 the Supreme Court did not require exhaustion of administrative remedies prior to resort to judicial relief. Welfare recipients requested court review of the compatibility of New York’s welfare laws with requirements of the Social Security Act. HEW was, at the time of the suit, reviewing New York’s statutes, and could have terminated federal funding if the state laws were found not to comply with federal criteria. The Court based its holding, in part, on the fact that petitioners could not “trigger” or participate in the Department’s review of state laws.
Complainants under the Buckley Amendment, in contrast, do have recourse to HEW; in fact, it is individual complaints which trigger HEW’s investigation. Past experience indicates that most conflicts can be resolved through the administrative mechanism provided by the Department. It would appear that in most cases plaintiffs seeking injunctive relief from a federal court would first have to pursue available remedies with HEW.
If the relief sought by individuals cannot be obtained from the agency or if the administrative remedy is not “complete and efficient,”62 courts may not await final agency action. When “great
and obvious damage” might be suffered, courts may likewise provide injunctive relief before an agency completes its review.63 Thus, if a case arose where violation of provisions of the Buckley Amendment raised the specter of great and immediate injury, where HEW’s procedures would not provide prompt enough relief, federal courts might excuse the failure to exhaust administrative remedies. However, if potential harm were of such a magnitude, it seems
reasonable to expect that a cause of action under state law, common or statutory, would hold promise of success. Then the federal court might decline to imply a remedy under the Buckley Amendment because of available relief elsewhere.
61. Rosado v. Wyman, 397 U.S. 397 (1970).
62. Goldstein v. Groesbeck, 142 F.2d 422 (2d Cir. 1944).
63. Utah Fuel Co. v. National Bitum. Coal Comm’n, 306 U.S. 56 (1939).
1980-1996: repealing Thiboutot, limiting Pulliam v. Allen
===
S. 3114 (1980), 126 Cong. Rec. 25292-25295 (Sept. 15, 1980) (remarks of Sen. Hatch)
S. 584 (1981), 127 Cong. Rec. 3209-3212 (Feb. 26, 1981), bill text at 3212 (remarks of Sen. Hatch); 127 Cong. Rec. 4782-4783 (March 19, 1981) (remarks of Sen. Hatch); 127 Cong. Rec. 8871-8873 (May 7, 1981) (remarks of Sen. Hatch); “Municipal Liability Under 42 U.S.C. 1983,” Hearings, May 6 and 7, July 8, and July 23, 1981, 1982 CIS S521-8, bill text at 3; 127 Cong. Rec. 17871 (July 28, 1981) (statement of Sen. Domeneci, presented by Sen. DeConcini)
S. 141 (1983), 129 Cong. Rec. 809-817 (Jan. 26, 1983), bill text at 817 (remarks of Sen. Hatch)
S. 436 (1985), 131 Cong. Rec. 2171 (Feb. 7, 1985) (remarks of Sen. Hatch); “Municipal Liabillity,” Hearings, Feb. 12, 1986, 1987 CIS 521-17, bill text at 4-5
S. 325 (1987), 133 Cong. Rec. 1473-1478 (Jan. 20, 1987) (remarks of Sen. Hatch)
===
Pub. L. 104-317, sec. 309
H.R. Rep. 104-798
S. Rep. 104-366
+++
141 Cong. Rec. H 7559 (July 25, 1995) (remarks of Rep. Owens).
141 Cong. Rec. H 9884 (Oct. 11, 1995) (testimony of David Bergman, Packard Children’s Hospital, October 2, 1995), reprinted in the Record via 141 Cong. Rec. H 9874, H 9880 (remarks of Rep. Pelosi).
141 Cong. Rec. H 14208 (Dec. 7, 1995) (remarks of Rep. Pallone).
CREC-1995-12-07-pt1-PgH14208-3
142 Cong. Rec. E1161-62 (June 25, 1996) (remarks of Rep. Stark).
142 Cong. Rec. S7208 June 27, 1996) (remarks of Sen. Chafee).
142 Cong. Rec. H7747 (July 17, 1996) (remarks of Rep. Wamp).
142 Cong. Rec. S8346-47 (July 19, 1996) (remarks of Sen, Rockefeller).
Pub. L. 104-193
===
1902(a)(8) Cases at the Seventh Circuit
Nasello v. Eagleson, No. 19-3215 (7th Cir., Oct. 6, 2020)
Saint Anthony Hosp. v. Eagleson, No. 1:20-cv-2561 (N.D. Ill., filed April 27, 2020)
Complaint
[]
Memorandum Opinion and Order, July 9, 2021
St Anthony Hosp memorandum opinion and order
Seventh Circuit # 21-2325
St Anthony Hospital opening brief, September 9, 2021
NHeLP amicus, September 17, 2021
Intervenors’ appellee brief, December 22, 2021
7C St A interv appellee br 12 22 21
State agency appellee brief, December 23, 2021
7C St A IL appellee br 12 23 21
Reply brief, January 14, 2022
| 02/15/2022 | 57 | Case heard and taken under advisement by panel: Diane P. Wood, Circuit Judge; David F. Hamilton, Circuit Judge and Michael B. Brennan, Circuit Judge. [57] [7217332] [21-2325] (MAN) [Entered: 02/15/2022 12:46 PM] |
Appellee’s supplemental letter on claim preclusion, February 17, 2022
7C St Anthony Hosp IL post OA letter 2 17
Seventh Circuit opinion, July 5, 2022
State’s petition for rehearing en banc, August 2, 2022
7C StAH Eagleson pet rheb 8 2 22
Health plans’ petition for rehearing en banc, August 2, 2022
7C StAH health plans pet rheb 8 2 22
Order requesting response, August 5, 2022
Response, August 19, 2022
Order denying rehearing en banc, September 8, 2022
Defendants’ motion to compel arbitration, November 23, 2022
Saint Anthony Hosp def mo compel arb 11 23 22
Cert petition, December ? 7 ? 9, 2022, No. 22-534
Managed care organizations amicus, January 5, 2023
20230105155656577_22-534_Brief
Medicaid Health Plans of America amicus, January 6, 2023
20230109134232314_Eagleson 22-534 – MHPA Amicus Brief – Final
| an 25 2023 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/17/2023. |
| Jan 31 2023 | Response Requested. (Due March 2, 2023) |
| Feb 15 2023 | Motion to extend the time to file a response from March 2, 2023 to April 3, 2023, submitted to The Clerk. |
| Main DocumentProof of Service | |
| Feb 17 2023 | Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including April 3, 2023, for all respondents. |
===
Daly v. Eagleson, No. 1:21-cv-6020 (N.D. Ill., filed )
Memorandum and Order, September 27, 2021
===
Another case from Wisconsin
US response to cert petition in Senger/Keup v. Wisconsin, No. 03-10777
===
1902(a)(23) Cases
Dear State Medicaid Director 16-5, April 19, 2016
smd16005
Dear State Medicaid Director 18-3, Jan. 19, 2018
smd18003
FOURTH CIRCUIT
[South Carolina memo supporting motion to dismiss, August 20, 2018]
Planned Parenthood South Atlantic v. Baker, No. 3:18-cv-2078 (D. S.C.), 326 F.Supp.3d 39 (August 28, 2018)
Appeal, No. 18-2133
[Planned Parenthood opposition to dismissal, September 4, 2018]
[US reply supporting dismissal, September 11, 2018]
Appellant’s opening brief, 11/26/2018
4C PPSA v. Baker appellant’s opening brief
Appellees’ brief, 1/14/2019
Reproductive rights organizations amicus, 1/22/2019
4c reproductive rights orgzs amicus
NHeLP amicus, 1/22/2019
Appellant’s opposition to amicus filings, 2/4/2019
4C opposition to amicus filings
Appellant’s reply brief, 2/4/2019
Order accepting amicus filings, 2/6/2019
4C order accepting amicus briefs
Opinion, 10/29/2019
SC request to extend time for filing for cert, January 3, 2020
20200103141603867_2020-01-03 SCDHHS PPSAT-Extension of Time Request For Petition for Cert
Extension order for filing for cert to 3/27/20, January 8, 2020
No. 19A752
[Planned Parenthood motion and memo for summary judgment, January 31, 2020]
[PP MSJ]
[South Carolina memo opposing summary judgment, February 24, 2020]
[Planned Parenthood summary judgment reply, February 28, 2020]
Order re cert procedures, March 19, 2020
[Opinion denying motion to dismiss, March 23, 2020]
Petition for certiorari, March 27, 2020 (No. 19-1186)
20200327125507902_USSC Petition for Writ of Certiorari
Motion to extend time for response to 5/29, April 24, 2020
20200424101633944_SC Medicaid Opp Cert Extension
| Apr 24 2020 | Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including May 29, 2020. |
American Center for Law and Justice amicus, April 29, 2020
20200429102735438_Baker v Edwards – Amicus brief
Family Policy Councils amicus, April 29, 2020
20200429123128336_Baker v. Edwards FPC Amici brief 4-29-20
Nebraska, Indiana, and 17 other states amicus, April 29, 2020
20200429123619148_Baker – 19-1186 – Amici States Brief
Americans United for Life amicus, April 29, 2020
20200429124844771_19-1186 Amicus Brief of American United for Life
137 Members of Congress amicus, April 29, 2020
20200429141634244_19-1186ac137MembersOfCongress
86 current and 2 former SC Legislators amicus, April 29, 2020
20200429152003850_Amicus Brief
Motion for extension of time to respond, May 21, 2020
20200521133704170_SC Medicaid Opp Cert Extension2
| May 22 2020 | Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including June 29, 2020. |
Motion for extension of time to respond, June 18, 2020
20200618095446571_SC Medicaid Opp Cert Extension3_
| Jun 19 2020 | Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including July 29, 2020 |
Opposition to petition for certiorari, July 29, 2020
20200729181358162_Baker v PP Brief in Opp FINAL
Petitioner’s motion to delay distribution, August 6, 2020
20200806193755957_Request for delay of distribution date
| Aug 07 2020 | Motion to delay distribution of the petition for a writ certiorari until September 16, 2020, granted. |
Petitioner’s reply, September 15, 2020
20200915103650182_19-1186 Reply Brief
[Trial court summary judgment opinion, September 17, 2020]
Respondents’ supplemental brief on mootness, September 22, 2020
20200922184224203_Baker v PP Supplemental Brief
Petitioners’ supplemental brief, October 8, 2020
20201008152609789_19-1186 Response to Supplemental Brief
Cert denied, October 13, 2020
Stipulation to dismiss additional counts, December 11, 2020
PP v Baker stip to dismiss addl counts
Judgment, December 11, 2020
| 12/14/2020 | 76 | TEXT ORDER Vacating 75 Judgment. Signed by Honorable Mary Geiger Lewis on 12/14/2020. (cbru, ) (Entered: 12/14/2020) |
Declaratory judgment and permanent injunction, December 14, 2020
South Carolina notice of appeal, January 8, 2021
Appeal #2 file number, 21-1043
Briefing order, January 26, 2021
Phillip opening brief, March 29, 2021
Appellees’ brief, May 28, 2021
Reproductive Rights and Justice Organizations amicus, June 3, 2021
4C reproductive rights and justice orgz amicus
National Health Law Program amicus, June 4, 2021
American Academy of Family Physicians amicus, June 4, 2021
Reply brief, July 2, 2021
Planned Parenthood request to file surreply, July 30, 2021
Order requesting response, August 2, 2021
SC response re surreply, August 12, 2021
4C South Carolina response re surreply 8 12
Order granting leave to file surreply, December 27, 2021
Planned Parenthood surreply, December 28, 2021
| 01/26/2022 | 79 | ORAL ARGUMENT (Video Conference) heard before the Honorable J. Harvie Wilkinson, III, James Andrew Wynn and Julius N. Richardson. Attorneys arguing case: Mr. John J. Bursch for Appellants Robert M. Kerr and Joshua Baker and Nicole A. Saharsky for Appellee Planned Parenthood South Atlantic. Courtroom Deputy: Joseph Coleman. [1001098922] [21-1043] JLC [Entered: 01/26/2022 11:35 AM] |
Opinion, March 8, 2022
Petition for certiorari, No. 21-1431, May 6, 2022
20220506114001794_2022.05.06 USSC Petition for Writ of Certiorari
Motion to expedite, May 6, 2022
20220511132732308_2022.05.06 Motion to Expedite Consideration of Petition
American Center for Law and Justice amicus, May 11, 2022
20220511150302295_Amicus Brief – Kerr v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic
102 Members of SC Legislature amicus, May 11, 2022
20220511144653356_21-1431 Amicus Brief
Family Policy Alliance amicus, May 11, 2022
20220511160604366_21-1431 Kerr v Planned Parenthood South Atlantic FPC Amici brief 5-11-22
Americans United for Life amicus, May 12, 2022
20220512092757709_21-1431 Amicus Brief of Americans United for Life
128 Members of Congress amicus, May 16, 2022
20220516141517156_21-1431 Brief for 128 Members of Congress in Support of Petitioner
Indiana et al amicus, May 16, 2022
20220516144846286_21-1431 tsac Indiana and Fifteen Other States
| May 17 2022 | Motion DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/2/2022. |
Letter from petitioners re Talevski, May 19, 2022
20220519182629702_2022.05.19 Letter to Court re Talveski stay order
Amended motion to expedite, May 27, 2022
20220527165956949_2022.05.27 Amended Motion to Expedite Consideration of Petition
Planned Parenthood request for extension of time, June 1, 2022
20220601104258491_Kerr v PPSAT – Opp Extension Letter PDFA
South Carolina opposition to extension of time, June 1, 2022
20220601144858967_2022.06.01 Response to request for extension
| Jun 06 2022 | Motion to expedite consideration of the petition for a writ of certiorari, as amended on May 27, 2022, DENIED. |
| Jun 06 2022 | Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including July 11, 2022. |
Second request for extension, June 30, 2022
20220630153503516_second extension request
| Jul 01 2022 | Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including August 10, 2022. |
Cert response, August 10, 2022
20220810155903347_21-1431 Brief in Opposition
| Aug 24 2022 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/28/2022. |
Cert reply, August 30, 2022
20220830111500698_21-1431 Reply Brief
==
FIFTH CIRCUIT
[]
US amicus brief
Planned Parenthood of Gulf Coast, Inc. v. Gee, 862 F.3d 445 (5th Cir. 2017)
Planned Parenthood of Gulf Coast Incorporated v Gee
Planned Parenthood of Gulf Coast, Inc. v. Gee, 876 F.3d 699 (5th Cir. 2017)
Planned Parenthood of Gulf Coast Incorporated v Gee(1)
Petition for cert, No 17-1492, filed April 27, 2018
20180427135540119_Gee v Planned Parenthood_cert. petition_PDF-a
American Center on Law and Justice amicus, May 30, 2018
20180531164747384_Gee v PPGC Amicus ACLJ
27 Family Policy Organizations amicus, May 31, 2018
20180531124951132_17-1492 Amicus Brief of Twenty-Seven Family Policy Organizations
90 Members of Congress amicus, May 31, 2018
20180531140245033_17-1492 Amcus BrIef of 90 Members of Congress
Indiana et al amicus, May 31, 2018
20180531152126434_Brief of Indiana et. al. as Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioner
Planned Parenthood opposition, July 2, 2018
20180702130527612_Gee v. Planned Parenthood Brief in Opposition
Petitioner’s reply, August 2, 2018
20180802114632261_Gee v Planned Parenthood reply brief_pdfA
| Dec 10 2018 | Petition DENIED Justice Thomas, with whom Justice Alito and Justice Gorsuch join, dissenting from the denial of certiorari. (Detached Opinion) |
==
Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas Family Planning & Preventative Health Services, Inc v. Smith, 913 F.3d 551 (5th Cir. 2019)
Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas Family Planning and Preventative Health Services Inc v Smith
Petition for rehearing en banc, January 31, 2019
Motion for stay, February 1, 2019
Order for rehearing en banc, February 4, 2019
Plaintiffs’ opposition, February 4, 2019
Order for TX reply, February 5, 2019
5C order for Smith reply 2 5 19
Smith reply supporting stay, February 7, 2019
Order carrying stay motion with case, February 15, 2019
5C order carrying stay w case 2 15 19
Appellants’ supplemental brief, March 7, 2019
77 Members of Congress amicus, March 14, 2019
Eagle Forum amicus, March 14, 2019
Louisiana/Mississippi amicus, March 14, 2019
Alliance Defending Freedom amicus, March 14, 2019
5C ADF amicus (not accepted) 3 14 19
Cruz Cornyn amicus, March 14, 2019
5C Cruz Cornyn mo leave 3 14 19
Appellees’ supplemental brief, April 8, 2019
18 U.S. Senators’ amicus, April 15, 2019
National Health Law Program amicus, April 18, 2019
| 05/14/2019 | EN BANC ORAL ARGUMENT HEARD Stewart, Jolly, Jones, Smith, Dennis, Owen, Elrod, Southwick, Haynes, Graves, Higginson, Costa, Willett, Ho, Duncan, Engelhardt En Banc;. Arguing Person Information Updated for: Kyle Douglas Hawkins arguing for Appellants Dr. Courtney Phillips, Et Al; Arguing Person Information Updated for: Jennifer Sandman arguing for Appellee Jane Doe I, Appellee Jane Doe 10, Appellee Jane Doe 11, Appellee Jane Doe 2, Appellee Jane Doe 4, Appellee Jane Doe 7, Appellee Jane Doe 9, Appellee Planned Parenthood Cameron County, Appellee Incorporated Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast, Appellee Planned Parenthood San Antonio, Appellee Planned Parenthood South Texas Surgical Center, Et Al. [17-50282] (PFT) [Entered: 05/14/2019 10:25 AM] |
Defendants’ supplemental authority (Herrera v. Wyoming), June 3, 2019
Plaintiffs’ supplemental authority, November 4, 2019
Defendants’ response, November 7, 2019
Plaintiffs’ supplemental authority, October 19, 2020
Defendants’ response, October 20, 2020
| 11/23/2020 | COURT DIRECTIVE ISSUED denying as moot motion to stay order filed by Appellants Mr. Charles Smith and Ms. Sylvia Hernandez Kauffman [8974562-2]. [17-50282] (CCR) [Entered: 11/23/2020 01:33 PM] |
Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas Family Planning & Preventative Health Services, Inc.
v. Kauffman, 981 F.3d 347 (5th Cir. 2020)
Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas Family Planning and Preventative Health Services Incorporated v
===
SEVENTH CIRCUIT
US trial level statement of interest
PP Ind US statement of interest
US amicus brief
Planned Parenthood of Indiana, Inc. v. Commissioner of Indiana State Department of Health,
699 F.3d 962 (7th Cir. 2012)
Planned Parenthood of Indiana Inc v Commissioner of Indiana State Dept Health
===
EIGHTH CIRCUIT
Does v. Gillespie,
Appellants’ brief, December 1, 2015
Appellees’ brief, January 29, 2016
NHeLP amicus, February 4, 2016
Plaintiffs’ additional authority (5th Circuit DOJ brief), February 18, 2016
8C Does addl auth Federal brief
Defendants’ response, February 23, 2016
Appellants’ reply brief, February 26, 2016
Plaintiffs’ additional authority (CMS letter), April 27, 2016
Defendants’ response, May 3, 2016
Plaintiffs’ additional authority (Gee), September 16, 2016
| 09/21/2016 | ARGUED & SUBMITTED in St. Louis to Judges Steven M. Colloton, Michael J. Melloy, Bobby E. Shepherd on 09/21/2016 Mr. Lee P. Rudofsky for Appellant John M. Selig and Ms. Jennifer Sandman for Appellees Jane Does and Planned Parenthood Arkansas & Eastern Oklahoma. Rebuttal by Mr. Lee P. Rudofsky for John M. Selig RECORDED. Click Here To Listen to Oral Argument [4450624] [15-3271] (LAH) [Entered: 09/21/2016 12:56 PM] |
Defendants’ additional authority (second injunction), September 29, 2016
Defendants’ additional authority, July 13, 2017
8C def addl authority revised Gee
Does v. Gillespie, 867 F.3d 1034 (8th Cir. 2017)
Plaintiffs’ petition for rehearing en banc, August 30, 2017
Order requesting response, September 27, 2017
Response to petition for rehearing en banc, October 24, 2017
Order denying petition for rehearing en banc, November 13, 2017
===
NINTH CIRCUIT
US amicus brief
Planned Parenthood Arizona v. Betlach, 727 F.3d 960 (9th Cir. 2013)
Planned Parenthood Arizona Inc v Betlach
===
TENTH CIRCUIT
[]
Planned Parenthood of Kan. v. Andersen, 882 F.3d 1205 (10th Cir. 2018)
Planned Parenthood of Kansas v Andersen
Cert petition, No. 17-1340, March 21, 2018
20180321141128195_Andersen v. Planned Parenthood of Kansas et al._Petition-1
Indiana et al amicus, April 16, 2018
20180423105359150_Brief of Indiana et al. as Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioner-1
Americans United for Life amicus, April 16, 2018
20180423103023537_17-1340 Amicus Brief of American United for Life-1
Planned Parenthood opposition, May 23, 2018
20180523164304452_17-1340 Brief in Opposition
Kansas reply, June 1, 2018
20180601103631521_17-1340 rb-1
| Dec 10 2018 | Petition DENIED. Justice Thomas, with whom Justice Alito and Justice Gorsuch join, dissenting from the denial of certiorari: I dissent for the reasons set out in Gee v. Planned Parenthood, 586 U. S. ___ (2018) (Thomas, J., dissenting). |
===
===
The Ninth Circuit’s single state agency case
San Lazaro Ass’n v. Connell
US statement of interest, 2001 WL 34094767
Khachik SIMONYAN Oganes Nagapetyan Plaintiffs-Appellees v Kathleen CONNELL Controller of the State o
Panel opinion
San Lazaro Assn Inc v Connell panel
Opinion on rehearing en banc
San Lazaro Assn Inc v Connell rheb
===
US amicus briefs in voting rights cases
Migliori, Third Circuit
Arkansas NAACP, Eighth Circuit
arkansas_state_conf_naacp_v._arkansas_boad_of_apportionment_no._22-1395_8th_cir._4.22.22
====
Foster care payments, etc., cases
Poole
Second Circuit
Opinion, April 19, 2019
Petition for rehearing en banc, June 23, 2019
Order denying rehearing en banc, with dissents, August 16, 2019
Petition for cert, No. 19-574, October 30, 2019
20191030180318056_Poole v NYSCCC_Petition for Writ
States’ amicus, December 2, 2019
20191202134552318_19-574 Poole v NYSCCC State Amici Brief 12-2-2019 FINAL
Brief in opposition, January 2, 2020
20200102121349135_NYSCCC BIO 1.2.2020
Poole reply, January 9, 2020
20200109154057873_19-574 Reply Brief
| Jan 27 2020 | Petition DENIED. |
===
Adoption assistance, etc., cases
Bryan C. v. Lambrew, No. 1:21-cv-5 (D. Maine, filed Jan. 6, 2021)
Complaint
First amended complaint, March 19, 2021
Maine motion to dismiss, April 2, 2021
Plaintiffs’ opposition to motion to dismiss, May 14, 2021
Reply supporting Maine motion to dismiss, May 28, 2021
Order on motion to dismiss, October 4, 2021, [2021 WL 4526851]
Bryan C v Lambrew order on mo dism 10 4 21
[]
==
M.B. v. Corsi, No. 2:17-cv-4102 (W.D. Mo., Jan. 18, 2018)
==
Elisa W. v. City of New York, No. 1:15-cv-5273 (S.D. N.Y., filed July 8, 2015)
Complaint
[]
Order on motion to dismiss, September 12, 2016
Elisa W opinion on dism 9 12 16
===
L.J. v. Wilbon, No. 09-2259 (4th Cir., Feb. 8, 2011)
===
Connor B. v. Patrick, No. 1:10-cv-30073 (D. Mass, filed April 15, 2010)
Complaint
[]
Order on motion to dismiss, January 4, 2011, 771 F.Supp.2d 142
Connor B order on mo dism 1 4 2011
[]
Order after bench trial, November 22, 2013
Connor B order after bench trial 11 22 2013
===
Sam M. v. Chafee, No. 1:07-cv-241 (D. R.I., filed June 28, 2007)
Complaint
[]
Order on motion to dismiss, July 20, 2011, 800 F.Supp.2d 363
Sam M order on mo dism 7 20 2011
[]
===
Olivia Y. v. Barbour, 351 F.Supp.2d 543 (S.D. Miss. 2004)
===
31 Foster Children v. Bush, No. []-[], 329 F.3d 1255 (11th Cir., May 8, 2003)
===
Kenny A. v. Barnes, No. 1:02-cv-1686 (N.D. Ga., removed July 19, 2002)
Notice of removal and attachments
[]
[]
Order on motion to dismiss, August 18, 2003, 218 F.R.D. 277
Kenny A order on mo dism 8 18 2003
[]
===
Brian A. v. Sundquist, No. 3:00-cv-445 (M.D. Tenn., filed May 10, 2000)
Complaint
[]
Order on motions to dismiss, October 26, 2000, 149 F.Supp.2d 941
Brian A ex rel Brooks v Sundquist
[]
[settled]
===
Charlie H. v. Whitman, 83 F.Supp.2d 476 (D. N.J. 2000)
===
Vienna Convention cases
U.S. v. Jimenez-Nava, 243 F.3d 192 (5th Cir. 2001)
U.S. v. Emuegbunam, 268 F.3d 377 (6th Cir. 2001)
Cornejo v. County of San Diego, 504 F.3d 853 (9th Cir. 2007)
Mora v. New York, 524 F.3d 183 (2d Cir. 2008)
Gandara v. Bennett, 528 F.3d 823 (11th Cir. 2008)
Earle v. District of Columbia, 707 F.3d 299 (D.C. Cir. 2012)
Waiver programs, and proposals, that would exclude Planned Parenthood
Idaho
Family Planning Referrals proposal, October 21, 2019
id-family-planning-referrals-pa
Family Planning Referrals completeness letter, October 28, 2019
id-family-planning-referrals-cmplt-ltr-20191028
South Carolina
Preconception Care proposal, August 23, 2018
sc-transitioning-preconception-care-pa
Preconception Care completeness letter, September 6, 2018
sc-transitioning-preconception-care-cmpltnss-ltr-090618
Tennessee
TennCare II Amendment 36 request, August 10, 2018
Texas
Healthy Texas Women proposal, June 28, 2017
Healthy Texas Women completeness letter, July 5, 2017
tx-healthy-women-cmpltnss-ltr-070517
Healthy Texas Women approval, January 22, 2020
Talevski (suits against private entities)
Talevski v. Health and Hospitals Corp. of Marion County, No. 2:19-cv-13 (N.D. Ind.), No. 20-1664 (7th Cir.)
[]
Opinion and Order, March 26, 2020
===
Analogies
Cummings complaint
Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller,No. 4:18-cv-649 (N.D. Tex., filed August 7, 2018)
Order dismissing complaint, January 16, 2019
[]
Fifth Circuit opinion, January 24, 2020
[]
Solicitor General’s views,
20210525164611783_20-219 Cummings vf
[]
Disability Organizations amicus brief,
20210830143841749_20-219 tsac Disability Organizations
[]
US amicus brief,
20210830222142004_20-219tsacUnitedStates
[]
Texas amicus brief,
20211006134712160_20-219 Amici Brief
[]
No. 20-219 (April 28, 2022)
====
Voting rights analogy
Arkansas voting rights opinion 2 24 22
Affordable Care Act Litigation 