Social Security Act cooperative federalism

Social Security Act, Pub. L. 74-271 (1935)

SSA 1935

H.R. 4120 as introduced

fdrbill

House Ways and Means hearings

hhrtitle

hhrcontents

hhr35129

hr35pres

hr35report1

hr35report2

hr35reportsup

hr35report3

hr35report4

hr35report5

hr35report6

hr35perkins1

hr35perkins2

[]

hr35benjamin

[]

hr35smith2-1

[]

House Ways and Means report

[]

Senate Finance hearings

s35contents

[?]

s35wittePart1

[?]

s35wittePart2

s35wittePart3

s35perkins

[?]

s35wittePart4

s35wittePart5

[?]

s35lenroot

[?]

s35folsom

 

===

1939 amendments, Pub. L. 76-379 (1939)

1939Act

1939 legislative history

Social Security Amendments of 1939

===

1950 amendments, Pub. L. 81-734 (1950)

STATUTE-64-Pg477

S. Rep. 81-1669, reprinted in 1950 USCCAN 3287

S REP 81-1669

Conf. Rep. 81-2771, reprinted in 1950 USCCAN 3482

CONF REP 81-2771

===

Pub. L. 84-880 (1956)

STATUTE-70-Pg807

S. Rep. 84-2133 (1956)

S REP 84-2133

Conf. Rep. 84-2936 (1956)

CONF REP 84-2936

===

Pub. L. 85-840 (1958)

840 (1958)

===

1960 amendments, Pub. L. 86-778 (1960)

STATUTE-74-Pg924

S. Rep. 86-1856, reprinted in 1960 USCCAN 3608

S REP 86-1856

Conf. Rep. 86-2165, reprinted in 1960 USCCAN 3749

CONF REP 86-2165

===

1961 amendments, Pub. L. 87-31 (1961)

STATUTE-75-Pg75

S. Rep. 87-165 (1961)

S REP 87-165

Conf. Rep. 87-307 (1961)

CONF REP 87-307

===

Social Security Amendments of 1962, Pub. L. 87-543 (1962)

STATUTE-76-Pg172

S. Rep. 87-1589 (1962)

S REP 87-1589

Conf. Rep. 87-2006 (1962)

CONF REP 87-2006

===

Economic Opportunity Act of 1964, Pub. L. 88-452 (1964), sec. 710

STATUTE-78-Pg508

H.R. Rep. No. 88-1458 (1964)

HR REP 88-1458

===

Medicare, Medicaid, Pub. L. 89-97 (1965)

STATUTE-79-Pg286-1

H.R. Rep. No. 89-213 (1965)

H.Rep.No.213-1965-pt1

H.Rep.No.213-1965-pt2

S. Rep. No. 89-404, reprinted in 1965 USCCAN 1943

S REP 89-404

Conf. Rep. 89-682, reprinted in 1965 USCCAN 2228

CONF REP 89-682

===

Pub. L. 90-248 (1968)

STATUTE-81-Pg821

S. Rep. 90-744 (1967)

S REP 90-744

Conf. Rep. 90-1030 (1967)

CONF REP 90-1030

===

Pub. L. 92-603 (1972)

Ie66cc1a1cb7c11d8a36b00065ba32aee

Ie680bed1cb7c11d8a36b00065ba32aee

Ie689e691cb7c11d8a36b00065ba32aee

Ie6930e51cb7c11d8a36b00065ba32aee

H.R. Rep. 92-231 (1971)

HR REP 92-231

Conf. Rep. 92-1605 (1972)

HR CONF REP 92-1605.doc

===

Pub. Law 93-233 (1973)

STATUTE-87-Pg947

H.R. Rep. 93-627 (1973)

HR REP 93-627

===

Rural Health Clinic Services Act, Pub. L. 95-210 (1977)

STATUTE-91-Pg1485

===

Pub. Law 96-170 (1979)

STATUTE-93-Pg1284

H.R. Rep. No. 96-548 (1979)

HR Rep 96-548

125 Cong. Rec. 33,651-33,653 (Nov. 27, 1979) (remarks of Reps. Dellums, Harris, McKinney, and Mazzoli)

125 Cong Rec 33651

125 Cong. Rec. 36,755-36,756 (Dec. 18, 1979) (remarks of Sen. Eagleton)

125 Cong Rec 36755

===

Pub. L. 96-247 (1980)

STATUTE-94-Pg349

H.R. Rep. No. 95-1058 (1978)

HR Rep 95-1058

124 Cong. Rec. 23,183-23,187 (July 28, 1978) (remarks of Rep. Wiggins and others)

124 Cong Rec 23183

S. Rep. 96-416 (1979)

S REP 96-416

126 Cong. Rec. 3943-3957 (Feb. 27, 1980) (remarks of Sen. Thurmond)

126 Cong Rec 3943

H. Conf. Rep. 96-897 (1980)

HR CONF REP 96-897

===

Pub. Law 97-35 (1981)

STATUTE-95-Pg357-5

S. 1377 as introduced, June 17, 1981

S. 1377 – June 17 1981

S. Rep. 97-139 (1981), reprinted in 1981 U.S. Code Cong. & Ad. News 395-1009

S REP 97-139

Additional excerpts from S. Rep. 97-139

S Rep 97-139, further excerpts

H.R. 3982 as it passed the Senate, July 13, 1981

#29 – REPORT – H.R. 3982 Referred with Amendments Senate July 13, 1981

Conf. Rep. 97-208 (1981), reprinted in 1981 U.S. Code Cong. & Ad. News 1010-1409

HR CONF REP 97-208

127 Cong. Rec. 6121 (April 1, 1981) (remarks of Sen. Baucus)

Baucus Dole Moynihan 4 1 1981

127 Cong. Rec. 18,957 (July 31, 1981) (remarks of Rep. Dingell)

127 Cong. Rec. 18957, 7 31 81

GPO-CRECB-1981-pt14-3-1-2

===

 

===

Pub. L. 99-272

STATUTE-100-Pg82-2

H.R. Rep. 99-241(I) (1985)

HR REP 99-241(I)

H.R. Rep. 99-241(II) (1985)

(3) H.R. Rep. No. 99-241 (H. Comm. on Education & Labor)

H.R. Rep. 99-241(III) (1985)

(4) H.R. Rep. No. 99-241 (H. Comm. on Judiciary)

S. Rep. 99-146 (1985)

S REP 99-146

H.R. Rep. 99-300 (1985)

HR REP 99-300

H.R. Conf. Rep. 99-453 (1985)

(1) H. Rep. No. 99-453 (1985) (Conf. Rep.)

===

OBRA ’89, Pub. L. 101-239

STATUTE-103-Pg2106

House Conference Report 101-386 (1989)

HR CONF REP 101-386

===

1995-96

H.R. 2491, as agreed to Nov. 20, 1995

BILLS-104hr2491enr-3

Veto message, 141 Cong. Rec. H14,136-H14,137 (Dec. 6, 1995)

CREC-1995-12-06-1

===

1996: welfare reform

H.R. 4, as vetoed by the President
 

In 1996, Congress replaced AFDC, which had been held for more than 25 years to give beneficiaries enforceable rights to assistance, with a program whose opening section stated: “NO INDIVIDUAL ENTITLEMENT.—This part shall not be interpreted to entitle any individual or family to assistance under any State program funded under this part.”  See Pub. L. 104-193, § 103/401(b), codified at 42 U.S.C. § 601(b).  Not only did this law show that Congress knows how to create an assistance program where beneficiaries do not have federally enforceable rights, but it showed that Congress could do this while preserving people’s entitlement to Medicaid.  See Pub. L. 104-193, § 103/114, codified at 42 U.S.C. § 1396u-1 (enacting mandatory Medicaid eligibility category where people who would have gotten AFDC-linked Medicaid are eligible for Medicaid even though AFDC has been repealed).  As the conference committee report explained:

House bill
Provides for continued application of AFDC standards and methodologies for certain families, entitling them to Medicaid. Allows cost-of-living adjustments in income standards above level of July 16, 1996. See ‘‘Prohibitions; Requirements—Medicaid’’ above.
Senate amendment
Same except that States may use less restrictive income standards and methodologies than under current law.
Conference agreement
The conference agreement follows the House bill.

H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 104-725 at 322 (emphasis furnished).

===

H.R. 3507 as introduced, May 22, 1996

BILLS-104hr3507ih

For Democrats’ response to the sec. 1508 limitations on private rights of action, see their remarks near the end of the H.R. 3734 committee report

crpt-104hrpt651-2

===

H.R. 3734 as introduced, June 27, 1996

bills-104hr3734rh-1-1

SEC. 1508. PRIVATE RIGHTS OF ACTION.

‘‘(a) LIMITATION ON FEDERAL CAUSES OF ACTION.—Except as provided in this section, no person or entity may bring an action against a State in Federal court based on its failure to comply with any requirement of this title.

‘‘(b) STATE CAUSES OF ACTION.—

‘‘(1) ADMINISTRATIVE AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURES.—A State plan shall provide for—

‘‘(A) an administrative procedure whereby an individual alleging a denial of eligibility for benefits or a denial of benefits under the State plan may receive a hearing regarding such denial, and

‘‘(B) judicial review, through a private right of action in a State court by an individual or class of individuals, regarding such a denial, but a State may require exhaustion of administrative remedies before such an action may be taken.

The administrative procedure under subparagraph (A) shall include impartial decision makers and a fair process and timely decisions.

‘‘(2) WRIT OF CERTIORARI.—An individual or class may file a petition for certiorari before the Supreme Court of the United States in a case of a denial of benefits under the State plan to review a determination of the highest court of a State regarding such denial.

(3) CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as requiring a State to provide a private right of action in State court by a provider, health plan, or a class of providers or health plans.

‘‘(c) SECRETARIAL RELIEF.—

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may bring an action in Federal court against a State and on behalf of an individual or class of individuals in order to assure that a State provides benefits to individuals and classes of individuals as guaranteed under subsection (a) or (b) of section 1501 under its State plan.

‘‘(2) NO PRIVATE RIGHT.—No action may be brought in any court against the Secretary based on the Secretary’s bringing, or failure to bring, an action under paragraph (1).

‘‘(3) CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this title shall be construed as authorizing the Secretary to bring an action on behalf of a provider, health plan, or a class of providers or health plans.

===

H.R. Rep. No. 104-651, June 27, 1996

crpt-104hrpt651-2

Sec. 1508. Private rights of action
This section sets forth a process for administrative and judicial remedies under this Act. Each State would be required to provide an administrative procedure with a hearing for an individual who alleged a denial of eligibility for benefits or a denial of benefits guaranteed under the State plan, and for judicial review through a private right of action in a State court, with a right to petition the Supreme Court for review. There would be no State private right of action for a provider or health plan.

The Secretary could bring an action in Federal court against a State on behalf of an individual regarding the provision of benefits guaranteed under the State plan. However, the Secretary could not be sued for failure to bring an action against a State or with regard to any action brought against a State.

===

Congressional Record consideration, July 17, 18, 19, 22, 23, and 31, 1996; August 1 and 2, 1996

crec-1996-07-17-1

crec-1996-07-18-1

crec-1996-07-19-1

crec-1996-07-22-1

crec-1996-07-23-1

crec-1996-07-31

crec-1996-08-01

crec-1996-08-01-bk2

crec-1996-08-02

===

H.R. 3829, as introduced July 17, 1996 (no MediGrant)

BILLS-104hr3829ih

===

H.R. 3734 as it passed the House, July 18, 1996

BILLS-104hr3734eh-3

SEC. 4103. BLOCK GRANTS TO STATES.

(a) IN GENERAL.—Part A of title IV (42 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) is amended—
(1) by striking all that precedes section 418 (as added by section 4803(b)(2) of this Act) and inserting the following:

‘‘PART A—BLOCK GRANTS TO STATES FOR TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE FOR NEEDY FAMILIES

‘‘SEC. 401. PURPOSE.
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The purpose of this part is to increase the flexibility of States in operating a program designed to—
‘‘(1) provide assistance to needy families so that children may be cared for in their own homes or in the homes of relatives;
‘‘(2) end the dependence of needy parents on government benefits by promoting job preparation, work, and marriage;
‘‘(3) prevent and reduce the incidence of out-of-wedlock pregnancies and establish annual numerical goals for preventing and reducing the incidence of these pregnancies; and
‘‘(4) encourage the formation and maintenance of two-parent families.
‘‘(b) NO INDIVIDUAL ENTITLEMENT.—This part shall not be interpreted to entitle any individual or family to assistance under any State program funded under this part.

***

SEC. 4115. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS TO MEDICAID PROGRAM.

(a) IN GENERAL.—Title XIX is amended—

(1) in section 1931, by inserting ‘‘subject to section 1931(a),’’ in subsection (a) after ‘‘under this title,’’ and by redesignating such section as section 1932; and

(2) by inserting after section 1930 the following new section:

‘‘CONTINUED APPLICATION OF STANDARDS AND METHODOLOGIES UNDER PART A OF TITLE IV FOR CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS

‘‘SEC. 1931. (a) For purposes of applying this title with respect to a State, notwithstanding any other provision of this title—

‘‘(1) except as provided in paragraphs (2) through (5), any reference in this title (or other provision of law in relation to the operation of this title) to a provision of part A of title IV, or a State plan under such part, shall be considered a reference to such provision or plan as in effect as of July 16, 1996, with respect to the State and eligibility for medical assistance under this title shall be determined as if such provision or plan (as in effect as of such date) remained in effect;

‘‘(2) any reference in section 1902(a)(5) or 1902(a)(55) to a State plan approved under part A of title IV shall be deemed a reference to a State program funded under such part;

‘‘(3) a State may provide that any income standard under the State plan referred to in paragraph (1) may be increased over a period (beginning after July 16, 1996) by a percentage that does not exceed the percentage increase in the consumer price index for all urban consumers (all items; U.S. city average) over such period;

‘‘(4) in applying section 1925, medical assistance is required to be provided under such section only if it is required to be provided under section 408(a)(13); and

‘‘(5) a State may terminate medical assistance under this title for an individual because the individual fails to meet any requirement imposed pursuant to section 407 if the individual was eligible for the medical assistance—

‘‘(A) on the basis of receipt of assistance under a State program funded under part A of title IV, or

‘‘(B) pursuant to paragraph (1), on the basis that the individual meets the requirements for receipt of aid or assistance under the State plan under part A of title IV (as in effect on July 16, 1996).

‘‘(b) In the case of a waiver of a provision of part A of title IV in effect with respect to a State as of July 16, 1996, if the waiver affects eligibility of individuals for medical assistance under this title, such waiver may continue to be applied, at the option of the State, in relation to this title after the date the waiver would otherwise expire.’’.

(b) PLAN AMENDMENT.—Section 1902(a) (42 U.S.C. 1396a(a)) is amended—

(1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph (61),

(2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (62) and inserting ‘‘; and’’, and

(3) by inserting after paragraph (62) the following new paragraph:

‘‘(63) provide for continuing to administer eligibility standards with respect to individuals who are (or seek to be) eligible for medical assistance based on the application of section 1931.’’.

(c) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—(1) Section 1902(c) (42 U.S.C. 1396a(c)) is amended by striking ‘‘if—’’ and all that follows and inserting the following: ‘‘if the State requires individuals described in subsection (l)(1) to apply for assistance under the State program funded under part A of title IV as a condition of applying for or receiving medical assistance under this title.’’.

(2) Section 1903(i) (42 U.S.C. 1396b(i)) is amended by striking paragraph (9).

===

H.R. 3734 as it passed the Senate, July 23, 1996

bills-104hr2491eas-1

SEC. 2103. BLOCK GRANTS TO STATES.

(a) IN GENERAL.—Part A of title IV (42 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) is amended—

(1) by striking all that precedes section 418 (as added by section 2803(b)(2) of this Act) and inserting the following:

‘‘PART A—BLOCK GRANTS TO STATES FOR TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE FOR NEEDY FAMILIES

‘‘SEC. 401. PURPOSE.

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The purpose of this part is to increase the flexibility of States in operating a program designed to—

‘‘(1) provide assistance to needy families so that children may be cared for in their own homes or in the homes of relatives;

‘‘(2) end the dependence of needy parents on government benefits by promoting job preparation, work, and marriage;

‘‘(3) prevent and reduce the incidence of out-of-wedlock pregnancies and establish annual numerical goals for preventing and reducing the incidence of these pregnancies; and

‘‘(4) encourage the formation and maintenance of two-parent families.

‘‘(b) NO INDIVIDUAL ENTITLEMENT.—This part shall not be interpreted to entitle any individual or family to assistance under any State program funded under this

part.

* * *

‘‘SEC. 408. PROHIBITIONS; REQUIREMENTS.

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—

“(11) ASSURING MEDICAID COVERAGE FOR LOW-INCOME FAMILIES.—

‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, subject to the succeeding provisions of this paragraph, with respect to a State any reference in title XIX (or other provision of law in relation to the operation of such title) to a provision of this part, or a State plan under this part (or a provision of such a plan), including standards and methodologies for determining income and resources under this part or such plan, shall be considered a reference to such a provision or plan as in effect as of July 1, 1996, with respect to the State.

‘‘(B) CONSTRUCTIONS.—

‘‘(i) In applying section 1925(a)(1), the reference to ‘section 402(a)(8)(B)(ii)(II)’ is deemed a reference to a corresponding earning disregard rule (if any) established under a State program funded under this part (as in effect on or after October 1, 1996).

‘‘(ii) The provisions of former section 406(h) (as in effect on July 1, 1996) shall apply, in relation to title XIX, with respect to individuals who receive assistance under a State program funded under this part (as in effect on or after October 1, 1996) and are eligible for medical assistance under title XIX or who are described in subparagraph (C)(i) in the same manner as they apply as of July 1, 1996, with respect to individuals who become ineligible for aid to families with dependent children as a result (wholly or partly) of the collection or increased collection of child or spousal support under part D of this title.

‘‘(iii) With respect to the reference in section 1902(a)(5) to a State plan approved under this part, a State may treat such reference as a reference either to a State program funded under this part (as in effect on or after October 1, 1996) or to the State plan under title XIX.

‘‘(C) ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA.—

‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of title XIX, subject to clause (ii), in determining eligibility for medical assistance under such title, an individual shall be treated as receiving aid or assistance under a State plan approved under this part (and shall be treated as meeting the income and resource standards under this part) only if the individual meets—

‘‘(I) the income and resource standards for determining eligibility under such plan; and

‘‘(II) the eligibility requirements of such plan under subsections (a) through (c) of former section 406 and former section 407(a), as in effect as of July 1, 1996. Subject to clause (ii)(II), the income and resource methodologies under such plan as of such date shall be used in the determination of whether any individual meets income and resource standards under such plan.

‘‘(ii) STATE OPTION.—For purposes of applying this paragraph, a State may—

‘‘(I) lower its income standards applicable with respect to this part, but not below the income standards applicable under its State plan under this part on May 1, 1988; and

‘‘(II) use income and resource standards or methodologies that are less restrictive than the standards or methodologies used under the State plan under this part as of July 1, 1996.

‘‘(iii) TRANSITIONAL COVERAGE.—For purposes of section 1925, an individual who is receiving assistance under the State program funded under this part (as in effect on or after October 1, 1996) and is eligible for medical assistance under title XIX shall be treated as an individual receiving aid or assistance pursuant to a State plan approved under this part (as in effect as of July 1, 1996) (and thereby eligible for continuation of medical assistance under such section 1925).

‘‘(D) WAIVERS.—In the case of a waiver of a provision of this part in effect with respect to a State as of July 1, 1996, if the waiver affects eligibility of individuals for medical assistance under title XIX, such waiver may (but need not) continue to be applied, at the option of the State, in relation to such title after the date the waiver would otherwise expire. If a State elects not to continue to apply such a waiver, then, after the date of the expiration of the waiver, subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) shall be applied as if any provisions so waived had not been waived.

‘‘(E) STATE OPTION TO USE 1 APPLICATION FORM.—Nothing in this paragraph, this part, or title XIX, shall be construed as preventing a State from providing for the same application form for assistance under a State program funded under this part (on or after October 1, 1996) and for medical assistance under title XIX.

‘‘(F) REQUIREMENT FOR RECEIPT OF FUNDS.—A State to which a grant is made under section 403 shall take such action as may be necessary to ensure that the provisions of this paragraph are carried out: Provided, That the State is otherwise participating in title XIX of this Act.

===

H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 104-725 (July 30, 1996)

crpt-104hrpt725-1-2

46. PROHIBITIONS; REQUIREMENTS—MEDICAID
Present law
States must provide Medicaid to all AFDC recipients and to some AFDC-related groups who do not receive cash aid. Examples include persons who do not receive a monthly payment because the amount would be below $10 (Federal law prohibits payments this small) and persons whose payments are reduced to zero in order to recover previous overpayments.
States must continue Medicaid for specified periods for certain families who lose AFDC benefits. If the family loses AFDC benefits because of increased earnings or hours of employment, Medicaid
coverage must be extended for 12 months. (During the second 6
months a premium may be imposed, the scope of benefits may be
limited, or alternate delivery systems may be used.) If the family
loses AFDC because of increased child or spousal support, coverage
must be extended for 4 months. States are also required to furnish
Medicaid to certain two-parent families whose principal earner is
unemployed and who are not receiving cash assistance because the
State has set a time limit on their AFDC coverage.
House bill
States must provide medical assistance to persons who would
be eligible for AFDC cash benefits (under terms of July 16, 1996)
if that program still were in effect.
A State may increase the AFDC income standard above that
of July 16, 1996 by the percentage increase in the consumer price
index for all urban consumers over the same period.
292
Senate amendment
States must provide medical assistance to persons who would
be eligible for AFDC (under terms of July 1, 1996) as if that program
were still in effect. Simplifies standards to make it easier for
States to administer. States would have the option to: (1) lower
their income standard, but not below those in effect on May 1,
1988; and (2) use income and resource standards and methodologies
that are less restrictive than those in effect on July 1, 1996.
In order to provide States additional flexibility, States may use
1 application form and may administer the program through either
its title IV agency or its title XIX agency.
Families would receive transitional Medicaid benefits as under
current law.
Conference agreement
The conference agreement follows the House bill and the Senate
amendment, with the modification that States must retain the
income and resource standards they had for AFDC eligibility on
July 16, 1996. States may terminate Medicaid eligibility for an
adult who is terminated from TANF because of failure to work.
Conferees are concerned that the conference agreement may require
States to maintain a dual-eligibility determination system.
Conferees, however, lacked adequate information to determine the
true nature and extent of this problem. Thus, conferees recommend
that the Committees on Ways and Means, Commerce, and Finance
conduct hearings in the next Congress to carefully examine this
problem. If the committees determine that the dual-eligibility system
does in fact impose additional administrative costs on the
States, Congress should consider Federal-State cost-sharing
schemes and other legislative solutions. In the meantime, conferees
are establishing a fund of $.5 billion in entitlement spending that
will be distributed among States that experience additional administrative
expenses directly attributable to conducting a dual-eligibility
system.

* * *

104. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS TO MEDICAID
Present law
House bill
Provides for continued application of AFDC standards and
methodologies for certain families, entitling them to Medicaid. Allows
cost-of-living adjustments in income standards above level of
July 16, 1996. See ‘‘Prohibitions; Requirements—Medicaid’’ above.
Senate amendment
Same except that States may use less restrictive income standards
and methodologies than under current law.
Conference agreement
The conference agreement follows the House bill.

===

Clinton signing statement, August 26, 1996

1996-usccan-2891

===

Pub. L. 104-193

plaw-104publ193-5

SEC. 103. BLOCK GRANTS TO STATES.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Part A of title IV (42 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) is amended—
(1) by striking all that precedes section 418 (as added by section 603(b)(2) of this Act) and inserting the following:

‘‘PART A—BLOCK GRANTS TO STATES FOR TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE FOR NEEDY FAMILIES

‘‘SEC. 401. PURPOSE.
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The purpose of this part is to increase the flexibility of States in operating a program designed to—
‘‘(1) provide assistance to needy families so that children may be cared for in their own homes or in the homes of relatives;
‘‘(2) end the dependence of needy parents on government benefits by promoting job preparation, work, and marriage;
‘‘(3) prevent and reduce the incidence of out-of-wedlock pregnancies and establish annual numerical goals for preventing and reducing the incidence of these pregnancies; and
‘‘(4) encourage the formation and maintenance of two-parent families.
‘‘(b) NO INDIVIDUAL ENTITLEMENT.—This part shall not be interpreted to entitle any individual or family to assistance under any State program funded under this part.

* * *

SEC. 114. ASSURING MEDICAID COVERAGE FOR LOW-INCOME
FAMILIES.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Title XIX is amended—
(1) by redesignating section 1931 as section 1932; and
(2) by inserting after section 1930 the following new section:
‘‘ASSURING COVERAGE FOR CERTAIN LOW-INCOME FAMILIES
‘‘SEC. 1931. (a) REFERENCES TO TITLE IV–A ARE REFERENCES
TO PRE-WELFARE-REFORM PROVISIONS.—Subject to the succeeding
provisions of this section, with respect to a State any reference in this title (or any other provision of law in relation to the operation of this title) to a provision of part A of title IV, or a State plan under such part (or a provision of such a plan), including income and resource standards and income and resource methodologies under such part or plan, shall be considered a reference to such a provision or plan as in effect as of July 16, 1996, with respect to the State.
‘‘(b) APPLICATION OF PRE-WELFARE-REFORM ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA.—
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of this title, subject to paragraphs (2) and (3), in determining eligibility for medical assistance—
‘‘(A) an individual shall be treated as receiving aid or assistance under a State plan approved under part A of title IV only if the individual meets—
‘‘(i) the income and resource standards for determining eligibility under such plan, and
‘‘(ii) the eligibility requirements of such plan under subsections (a) through (c) of section 406 and section 407(a), as in effect as of July 16, 1996; and
‘‘(B) the income and resource methodologies under such plan as of such date shall be used in the determination of whether any individual meets income and resource standards under such plan.
‘‘(2) STATE OPTION.—For purposes of applying this section, a State—
‘‘(A) may lower its income standards applicable with respect to part A of title IV, but not below the income standards applicable under its State plan under such part on May 1, 1988;
‘‘(B) may increase income or resource standards under the State plan referred to in paragraph (1) over a period (beginning after July 16, 1996) by a percentage that does not exceed the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers (all items; United States city average) over such period; and
‘‘(C) may use income and resource methodologies that are less restrictive than the methodologies used under the State plan under such part as of July 16, 1996.
‘‘(3) OPTION TO TERMINATE MEDICAL ASSISTANCE FOR FAILURE TO MEET WORK REQUIREMENT.—
‘‘(A) INDIVIDUALS RECEIVING CASH ASSISTANCE UNDER TANF.—In the case of an individual who—
‘‘(i) is receiving cash assistance under a State program funded under part A of title IV,
‘‘(ii) is eligible for medical assistance under this title on a basis not related to section 1902(l), and
‘‘(iii) has the cash assistance under such program terminated pursuant to section 407(e)(1)(B) (as in effect on or after the welfare reform effective date) because of refusing to work,
the State may terminate such individual’s eligibility for medical assistance under this title until such time as there no longer is a basis for the termination of such cash assistance because of such refusal.
‘‘(B) EXCEPTION FOR CHILDREN.—Subparagraph (A) shall not be construed as permitting a State to terminate medical assistance for a minor child who is not the head of a household receiving assistance under a State program funded under part A of title IV.
‘‘(c) TREATMENT FOR PURPOSES OF TRANSITIONAL COVERAGE PROVISIONS.—
‘‘(1) TRANSITION IN THE CASE OF CHILD SUPPORT COLLECTIONS.—
The provisions of section 406(h) (as in effect on July 16, 1996) shall apply, in relation to this title, with respect to individuals (and families composed of individuals) who are described in subsection (b)(1)(A), in the same manner as they applied before such date with respect to individuals who became ineligible for aid to families with dependent children as a result (wholly or partly) of the collection of child or spousal support under part D of title IV.
‘‘(2) TRANSITION IN THE CASE OF EARNINGS FROM EMPLOYMENT.—
For continued medical assistance in the case of individuals (and families composed of individuals) described in subsection (b)(1)(A) who would otherwise become ineligible because of hours or income from employment, see sections 1925 and 1902(e)(1).
‘‘(d) WAIVERS.—In the case of a waiver of a provision of part A of title IV in effect with respect to a State as of July 16, 1996, or which is submitted to the Secretary before the date of the enactment of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 and approved by the Secretary on or before July 1, 1997, if the waiver affects eligibility of individuals for medical assistance under this title, such waiver may (but need not) continue to be applied, at the option of the State, in relation to this title after the date the waiver would otherwise expire.
‘‘(e) STATE OPTION TO USE 1 APPLICATION FORM.—Nothing in this section, or part A of title IV, shall be construed as preventing a State from providing for the same application form for assistance under a State program funded under part A of title IV (on or after the welfare reform effective date) and for medical assistance under this title.
‘‘(f) ADDITIONAL RULES OF CONSTRUCTION.—
‘‘(1) With respect to the reference in section 1902(a)(5) to a State plan approved under part A of title IV, a State may treat such reference as a reference either to a State program funded under such part (as in effect on and after the welfare reform effective date) or to the State plan under this title.
‘‘(2) Any reference in section 1902(a)(55) to a State plan approved under part A of title IV shall be deemed a reference to a State program funded under such part.
‘‘(3) In applying section 1903(f), the applicable income limitation otherwise determined shall be subject to increase in the same manner as income or resource standards of a State may be increased under subsection (b)(2)(B).
‘‘(g) RELATION TO OTHER PROVISIONS.—The provisions of this section shall apply notwithstanding any other provision of this Act.
‘‘(h) TRANSITIONAL INCREASED FEDERAL MATCHING RATE FOR INCREASED ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS.—
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to the succeeding provisions of this subsection, the Secretary shall provide that with respect to administrative expenditures described in paragraph (2) the per centum specified in section 1903(a)(7) shall be increased to such percentage as the Secretary specifies.
‘‘(2) ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENDITURES DESCRIBED.—The administrative expenditures described in this paragraph are expenditures described in section 1903(a)(7) that a State demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Secretary are attributable to administrative costs of eligibility determinations that (but for the enactment of this section) would not be incurred.
‘‘(3) LIMITATION.—The total amount of additional Federal funds that are expended as a result of the application of this subsection for the period beginning with fiscal year 1997 and ending with fiscal year 2000 shall not exceed $500,000,000.
In applying this paragraph, the Secretary shall ensure the equitable distribution of additional funds among the States.
‘‘(4) TIME LIMITATION.—This subsection shall only apply with respect to a State for expenditures incurred during the first 12 calendar quarters in which the State program funded under part A of title IV (as in effect on and after the welfare reform effective date) is in effect.
‘‘(i) WELFARE REFORM EFFECTIVE DATE.—In this section, the term ‘welfare reform effective date’ means the effective date, with respect to a State, of title I of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (as specified in section 116 of such Act).’’.
(b) PLAN AMENDMENT.—Section 1902(a) (42 U.S.C. 1396a(a)) is amended—
(1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph (61),
(2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (62) and inserting ‘‘; and’’, and
(3) by inserting after paragraph (62) the following new paragraph:
‘‘(63) provide for administration and determinations of eligibility with respect to individuals who are (or seek to be) eligible for medical assistance based on the application of section 1931.’’.
(c) EXTENSION OF WORK TRANSITION PROVISIONS.—Sections 1902(e)(1)(B) and 1925(f) (42 U.S.C. 1396a(e)(1)(B), 1396r–6(f)) are each amended by striking ‘‘1998’’ and inserting ‘‘2001’’.
(d) ELIMINATION OF REQUIREMENT OF MINIMUM AFDC PAYMENT LEVELS.—(1) Section 1902(c) (42 U.S.C. 1396a(c)) is amended by striking ‘‘if—’’ and all that follows and inserting the following:
‘‘if the State requires individuals described in subsection (l)(1) to apply for assistance under the State program funded under part A of title IV as a condition of applying for or receiving medical assistance under this title.’’.
(2) Section 1903(i) (42 U.S.C. 1396b(i)) is amended by striking paragraph (9).

+++

141 Cong. Rec. H 7559 (July 25, 1995) (remarks of Rep. Owens).

CREC-1995-07-25-pt1-PgH7559

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).

CREC-1995-10-11-pt1-PgH9874

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).

CREC-1996-06-25-pt1-PgE1161-4

142 Cong. Rec. S7208 June 27, 1996) (remarks of Sen. Chafee).

CREC-1996-06-27-pt1-PgS7208

142 Cong. Rec. H7747 (July 17, 1996) (remarks of Rep. Wamp).

CREC-1996-07-17-pt1-PgH7745-4

142 Cong. Rec. S8346-47 (July 19, 1996) (remarks of Sen, Rockefeller).

CREC-1996-07-19-pt1-PgS8336

Pub. L. 104-193

plaw-104publ193-5

===

Pub. L 104-317 (1996)

PLAW-104publ317-3

===

CHIP, Pub. L. 105-33, sec. 4901/2102(b)(4)

BALANCED BUDGET

“(b) GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF ELIGIBILITY STANDARDS AND METHODOLOGY.—
“(1) ELIGIBILITY STANDARDS.—
“(A) IN GENERAL.—The plan shall include a description of the standards used to determine the eligibility of targeted low-income children for child health assistance under the plan. Such standards may include (to the extent consistent with this title) those relating to the geographic areas to be served by the plan, age, income and resources (including any standards relating to spenddowns and disposition of resources), residency, disability status (so long as any standard relating to such status does not restrict eligibility), access to or coverage under other health coverage, and duration of eligibility. Such standards may not discriminate on the basis of diagnosis.
“(B) LIMITATIONS ON ELIGIBILITY STANDARDS.—Such eligibility standards—
“(i) shall, within any defined group of covered targeted low-income children, not cover such children with higher family income without covering children with a lower family income, and
“(ii) may not deny eligibility based on a child having a preexisting medical condition.
“(2) METHODOLOGY.—The plan shall include a description of methods of establishing and continuing eligibility and enrollment.
“(3) ELIGIBILITY SCREENING; COORDINATION WITH OTHER HEALTH COVERAGE PROGRAMS.—The plan shall include a description of procedures to be used to ensure—
“(A) through both intake and followup screening, that only targeted low-income children are furnished child health assistance under the State child health plan;
“(B) that children found through the screening to be eligible for medical assistance under the State medicaid plan under title XIX are enrolled for such assistance under such plan;
“(C) that the insurance provided under the State child health plan does not substitute for coverage under group health plans;
“(D) the provision of child health assistance to targeted low-income children in the State who are Indians (as defined in section 4(c) of the Indian Health Care Improvement Act, 25 U.S.C. 1603(c)); and
“(E) coordination with other public and private programs providing creditable coverage for low-income children.
“(4) NONENTITLEMENT.—Nothing in this title shall be construed as providing an individual with an entitlement to child health assistance under a State child health plan.

===

Public Law 106-554, Appendix F, sec. 702

PLAW-106publ554

===

THE U.S. SUPREME COURT CASE ON ENFORCING THE FEDERAL NURSING HOME REFORM ACT

Seventh Circuit nursing home case

Talevski v. Health and Hospital Corp. of Marion County, No. 2:19-cv-13 (N.D. Ind., March 26, 2020)

4095500-0–62280

Seventh Circuit No. 20-1664

Opening brief, July 31, 2020

7C appellant brief

AARP amicus, August 7, 2020

7C AARP amicus

NHeLP amicus, August 7, 2020

7C NHeLP amicus

Law Professors amicus, August 7, 2020

7C Law Professors amicus

Appellee brief, September 29, 2020

7C appellee brief

States’ amicus, October 6, 2020

7C states amicus

Indiana HCA amicus, October 6, 2020

7C IHCA amicus

Talevski reply brief, November 3, 2020

7C Talevski reply brief

Seventh Circuit opinion, July 27, 2021

7C Talevski opinion 7 27

Petition for rehearing, August 10, 2021

7C petition rheb 8 10 21

Order denying rehearing, August 25, 2021

7C order denying rheb

21-806

Cert petition, November 23, 2021

20211123155211479_HHC Petition and Appendix FINAL for E FILIING

Waiver of right to respond, December 20, 2021

20211220101052998_WAIVER

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.

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

====

General Materials: cases

King v. Smith, 392 U.S. 309 (1968)

king v. smith justia

Rosado v. Wyman, 397 U.S. 397 (1970)
Rosado v Wyman-1

Townsend v. Swank, 404 U.S. 282 (1971)

Townsend v Swank

Jefferson v. Hackney, 406 U.S. 535 (1972)

Jefferson v Hackney

Chapman v. Houston Welfare Rights Organization, 441 U.S. 600 (1979)

Chapman v Houston Welfare Rights Organization

Maine v. Thiboutot, 448 U.S. 1 (1980)

Maine v Thiboutot

Thiboutot oral argument, April 22, 1980

Маіnе v. Тhіbоutоt

Маіnе v. Тhіbоutоt – Оrаl Аrgumеnt – Арrіl 22, 1980 (Раrt 2)

Wright v. City of Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority, 479 U.S. 418 (1987)
Wright v City of Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority

Wilder v. Virginia Hospital Association, 496 U.S. 498 (1990)
Wilder v Virginia Hosp Assn

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

95-1441_01-06-1997

Barnes v. Gorman, 536 U.S. 181 (2002)

Barnes v. Gorman copy copy

Gonzaga University v. Doe, 536 U.S. 273 (2002)
Gonzaga University v Doe

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

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

Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller, No. 20-219 (U.S., April 28, 2022)

20-219_1b82

===

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

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

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

[Administrative Conference of the US recommendation, 1971? 1973?]

71-9

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

1902(a)(8) Cases at the Seventh Circuit

Nasello v. Eagleson, No. 19-3215 (7th Cir., Oct. 6, 2020)

7C Nasello opinion 10 6 20

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

[]

[]

Reply brief, January 14, 2022

7C St Anthony Hosp rb 1 14

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

rssExec-3

Daly v. Eagleson, No. 1:21-cv-6020 (N.D. Ill., filed )

Memorandum and Order, September 27, 2021

Daly opinion 9 27 21

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]

[SC memo dism]

Planned Parenthood South Atlantic v. Baker, No. 3:18-cv-2078 (D. S.C.), 326 F.Supp.3d 39 (August 28, 2018)

PPSA v. Baker PI

Appeal, No. 18-2133

[Planned Parenthood opposition to dismissal, September 4, 2018]

[PP dism op]

[US reply supporting dismissal, September 11, 2018]

[US reply dism]

Appellant’s opening brief, 11/26/2018

4C PPSA v. Baker appellant’s opening brief

Appellees’ brief, 1/14/2019

4c pp appellees’ brief

Reproductive rights organizations amicus, 1/22/2019

4c reproductive rights orgzs amicus

NHeLP amicus, 1/22/2019

4c nhelp amicus

Appellant’s opposition to amicus filings, 2/4/2019

4C opposition to amicus filings

Appellant’s reply brief, 2/4/2019

4C reply brief

Order accepting amicus filings, 2/6/2019

4C order accepting amicus briefs

Opinion, 10/29/2019

4C PP v Baker opinion

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

USC extension to 3 27

[Planned Parenthood motion and memo for summary judgment, January 31, 2020]

[PP MSJ]

[South Carolina memo opposing summary judgment, February 24, 2020]

[SC MSJ op]

[Planned Parenthood summary judgment reply, February 28, 2020]

[PP SJ reply]

Order re cert procedures, March 19, 2020

031920zr_d1o3

[Opinion denying motion to dismiss, March 23, 2020]

[M dism denial]

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]

[PP v. Baker SJ order]

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

101320zor_8m58

Stipulation to dismiss additional counts, December 11, 2020

PP v Baker stip to dismiss addl counts

Judgment, December 11, 2020

PP v Baker judgment 12 11 20

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

decl j perm i

South Carolina notice of appeal, January 8, 2021

SC 2d NOA

Appeal #2 file number, 21-1043

Briefing order, January 26, 2021

4C briefing order

Phillip opening brief, March 29, 2021

4C2 Phillip OB

Appellees’ brief, May 28, 2021

4C appellees brief

Reproductive Rights and Justice Organizations amicus, June 3, 2021

4C reproductive rights and justice orgz amicus

National Health Law Program amicus, June 4, 2021

4C NHeLP amicus

American Academy of Family Physicians amicus, June 4, 2021

4C American Acad Fam P amicus

Reply brief, July 2, 2021

4C SC reply brief

Planned Parenthood request to file surreply, July 30, 2021

4C PP surreply mo 7 30

Order requesting response, August 2, 2021

4C PP order rq rsp 8 2

SC response re surreply, August 12, 2021

4C South Carolina response re surreply 8 12

Order granting leave to file surreply, December 27, 2021

4C surreply order 12 27

Planned Parenthood surreply, December 28, 2021

4C2 PP surreply 12 28

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

4C opinion 3 8 22

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.

==

FIFTH CIRCUIT

[]

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)

17-1492_g3bi

==

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

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

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,

[]

Does v. Gillespie, 867 F.3d 1034 (8th Cir. 2017)

Does v Gillespie WL

[]

===

NINTH CIRCUIT

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).

===

     

===

Foster care payments, etc., cases

Poole

Second Circuit

Opinion, April 19, 2019

2C Poole opinion 4 19 19

2C Livingston dissent 4 19

Petition for rehearing en banc, June 23, 2019

2C petition rheb

Order denying rehearing en banc, with dissents, August 16, 2019

2C order denying rheb

2C Livingston dissent

2C Cabranes dissent

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

Bryan C complaint 1 6 22

First amended complaint, March 19, 2021

Bryan C 1st am C 3 19

Maine motion to dismiss, April 2, 2021

Bryan C ME mo dism 4 2 21

Plaintiffs’ opposition to motion to dismiss, May 14, 2021

Bryan C dism op 5 14

Reply supporting Maine motion to dismiss, May 28, 2021

Bryan C dism reply 5 28

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)

M.B. order on mo dism 1 818

==

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)

4C LJ v Wilbon opinion

===

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)

Olivia Y decision

===

31 Foster Children v. Bush, No. []-[], 329 F.3d 1255 (11th Cir., May 8, 2003)

31 Foster Children v Bush

===

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)

Charlie H v Whitman

===

Vienna Convention cases

U.S. v. Jimenez-Nava, 243 F.3d 192 (5th Cir. 2001)

243_F.3d_192

U.S. v. Emuegbunam, 268 F.3d 377 (6th Cir. 2001)

268_F.3d_377

Cornejo v. County of San Diego, 504 F.3d 853 (9th Cir. 2007)

504_F.3d_853

Mora v. New York, 524 F.3d 183 (2d Cir. 2008)

524_F.3d_183

Gandara v. Bennett, 528 F.3d 823 (11th Cir. 2008)

528_F.3d_823

Earle v. District of Columbia, 707 F.3d 299 (D.C. Cir. 2012)

707_F.3d_299

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

tn-tenncare-ii-pa4

Texas

Healthy Texas Women proposal, June 28, 2017

tx-healthy-women-pa

Healthy Texas Women completeness letter, July 5, 2017

tx-healthy-women-cmpltnss-ltr-070517

Healthy Texas Women approval, January 22, 2020

tx-healthy-women-ca

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

4095500-0–10779

Analogies

Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller, No. 20-219 (April 28, 2022)

20-219_1b82