Here’s a summary of health-related litigation where there’s a Trump to Biden transition underway, or a possible transition; I’ll try to update the summary when needed.
Links to pre-January-20 cases where a transition is underway
The Global Challenge, see https://affordablecareactlitigation.com/a-global-challenge/
The challenges to the Trump Administration association health plan regulations, see https://affordablecareactlitigation.com/whittling-away/
The challenges to the 2018/19 Trump Administration notice of benefit and policy parameters, see https://affordablecareactlitigation.com/whittling-away/
The challenges to the Trump Administration short-term limited-duration regulations, see https://affordablecareactlitigation.com/whittling-away/
The challenges to the Trump Administration 1557 regulations, see https://affordablecareactlitigation.com/aca-enforcement-directly-and-1557/
The challenges to the Trump Administration religious and moral objections regulations, see https://affordablecareactlitigation.com/religious-and-moral/
The challenges to the Trump Administration 1303 regulations, see https://affordablecareactlitigation.com/religious-and-moral/
The challenges to the Trump Administration Title X regulations, see https://affordablecareactlitigation.com/title-x-program-integrity/
The challenges to the Trump Administration statutory conscience protections, see https://affordablecareactlitigation.com/statutory-conscience-rights/
The challenges to the Trump Administration 1115 “community engagement” policies, see https://affordablecareactlitigation.com/1115-medicaid-waivers-community-engagement/
The challenges (if any) to the Trump Administration’s Medicaid block grant policies, see https://affordablecareactlitigation.com/medicaid-1115-block-grant-waivers/
The challenge to the Trump Administration’s 1332 policies, in the form of the complaint against Georgia’s 1332 waiver, see https://affordablecareactlitigation.com/1332-2/
Non-ACA cases:
The sunset rule case, County of Santa Clara v. U.S. D.H.H.S., No. 5:21-cv-1655 (N.D. Cal.), filed March 18, 2021
County-of-Santa-Clara-et-al.-v.-HHS-et-al.-Complaint-3.9.21
The challenge to the SNAP work requirements no-waiver policy, see D.C./Bread for the City v. Dep’t of Agriculture, 1:20-cv-119 (D. D.C.), appeals, Nos. 20-5136 and 20-5371 (D.C. Cir.), https://affordablecareactlitigation.com/miscellaneous-aca-litigation/
The challenges to the Biden Administration deportation pause
6:21-cv-3 (S.D. Tex.)
2:21-cv-186 (D. Ariz.)
Texas v. U.S., the Unworthy Immigration Agreement case, No. 6:21-cv-3 (S.D. Tex., filed January 22, 2021)
Complaint
Note: Exhibits A-C are appended both to the Complaint and the TRO motion
Emergency TRO application
Emergency TRO application 1 22
Exhibit A, the Unworthy Immigration Agreement (executed 12/31 and 1/8)
US-Texas Agreement 12 31 20 1 8 21
Exhibit B, Pekoske memo, January 20
Exhibit C, Paxton letter to Pekoske, January 21
Exhibit D, Smoot affidavit
Exhibit E, Lopez declaration
Proposed TRO
ACLU amicus filing, January 22, 2021
Texas ‘advisory,’ January 24, 2021
Order for conference, January 24, 2021
US opposition to TRO, January 25, 2021
US response to advisory, January 25, 2021
| 01/25/2021 | Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Drew B Tipton. ZOOM HEARING held on 1/25/2021. Regarding Advisory 6 . The Court instructs Defense Counsel to submit a copy of the email referenced in the Advisory (Dkt. 6) and to preserve any evidence, emails, texts, instant messages or any other communication from January 22, 2021 forward related to the release of individuals in custody that were subject to an Order of Removal. Defense Counsel is further instructed to verify and advise the Court whether the only individuals in custody that were subject to an Order of Removal that have been released since January 22, 2021 were pursuant to the California litigation referenced in (Dkt. #9). Defense Counsel is further instructed to advise the Court of the number of individuals in custody that were subject to an Order of Removal who have been released from custody in the United States since Friday January 22, 2021 and the locations from which they were released. Appearances:Adam Kirschner. William Thomas Thompson, Patrick K Sweeten, Daniel David Hu.(Digital # 8:01-8:35)(ERO:Annette Martinez), filed.(KelliePapaioannou, 2) (Entered: 01/25/2021) |
US notice re e-mails, January 25, 2021
TRO, January 26, 2021
RAICES intervention papers, January 27, 2021
| 01/29/2021 | Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Drew B Tipton. STATUS CONFERENCE held on 1/29/2021. Motion to Intervene 28 discussed. Responses to motion due by Wednesday, February 3, 2021. Discovery issues addressed. The parties agree and the Court limits interrogatories to seven, requests for admissions to five and no requests for production. Parties may attach any evidence to supplemental briefings. Primary briefing is limited to 40 pages. Replies limited to 25 pages. Times New Roman font 12pt to be used for the body and Times New Roman 11pt to be used for footnotes. The Court discourages excessive use of footnotes. The Court orders the United States to produce the Administrative Record by 2/3/2021. Briefing schedule to be entered. Appearances:Cody Wofsy. Andre Ivan Segura, Brian C Rosen-Shaud, Adam David Kirschner, Todd Lawrence Disher, Patrick K Sweeten, Daniel David Hu.(Digital # 11:03-12:46)(ERO:Frenchie Carbia), filed.(KelliePapaioannou, 2) (Entered: 01/29/2021) |
Notice to the parties of issue, February 1, 2021
Texas opposition to RAICES intervention, February 3, 2021
Memorandum and order for preliminary injunction, February 23, 2021
Preliminary injunction 2 23 21
Reade amicus request, March 1, 2021
| 03/09/2021 | Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Drew B Tipton. STATUS CONFERENCE held on 3/9/2021. The United States deadline for filing an Answer is extended to May 27, 2021. The Parties have agreed to stay discovery until the United States Answers. Discussion held regarding the refusal of ICE to honor detainers which have historically resulted in the removal of aliens who have committed felonies and who are completing their federal sentences. Further discussion held regarding the refusal of ICE to remove aliens who have committed felonies that have requested to be deported. The Court instructs counsel for the United States to provide the name of the individual within DHS that has instructed ICE to not remove aliens who have committed felonies and who are completing their federal sentences, as well as the name of the individual within DHS that has instructed ICE to not remove aliens who have committed felonies and have requested to be deported. Appearances: Kathryn Lynn Huddleston, Adam David Kirschner, Todd Lawrence Disher, Patrick K Sweeten, Daniel David Hu.(Digital # 10:01-10:23)(ERO:Verlinda Rios), filed.(KelliePapaioannou, 2) (Entered: 03/10/2021) |
Arizona v. U.S. D.H.S., No. 2:21-cv-186 (D. Ariz.)
Arizona complaint with exhibits, February 3, 2021
Arizona/Montana motion for preliminary injunction, March 8, 2021
Immigration Law Reform Institute amicus, March 24, 2021
US opposition to motion for preliminary injunction, March 26, 2021
ACLU amicus, March 26, 2021
Unopposed US motion for extension of time to answer, March 30, 2021
Order granting extension of time to answer, March 30, 2021
Motion to transfer Puente Human Rights Movement case to Judge Bolton, March 30, 2021
Arizona/Montana reply supporting preliminary injunction, April 2, 2021, with exhibits
Puente Human Rights Movement v. Brnovich, No. 2:21-cv-446 (D. Ariz)
Complaint, March 16, 2021
Unopposed motion for extension of time to answer, March 29, 2021
Order granting motion for extension of time to answer, March 29, 2021
Motion to transfer Puente Human Rights Movement case to Judge Bolton, March 30, 2021
US filing supporting transfer, April 6, 2021
Intervening on appeal at the Supreme Court to defend a prior Administration’s regulation
SUPREME COURT MOTION PRACTICE IN THE TITLE X CASES, Nos. 20-429, 20-454, 20-539
Ohio motion to intervene in Supreme Court case, March 8, 2021
20210308151317902_Title X Intervention Motion
Joint stipulation to dismiss, March 12, 2021
20210312173545229_20-429 and 20-539 – AMA v. Cochran – Oregon v. Cochran – Stipulation to Dismiss
American Ass’n of Pro-Life Ob’s and Gyn’s motion to interevene or present oral argument in Supreme Court case, March 12, 2021
AAPLObGyn’s motion for leave to file supplemental brief, and supplemental brief, March 15, 2021
Ohio et al motion for leave to file supplemental brief, and supplemental brief, March 15, 2021
20210315162546294_Motion for Leave to File Supp Brief
US opposition to motions to intervene, March 18, 2021
20210318164758577_20-429 et al. American Medical Assn et al. Govt Opp to Motions to Intervene
State petitioners’ opposition to motions to intervene, March 18, 2021
20210318191449392_20-539 States of Oregon et al Opposition to Motions to Intervene.Final
AMA, et al, opposition to motions to intervene, March 18, 2021
20210318192845954_20-429 and 20-454 – AMA v. Cochran – Opposition to Motions to Intervene
Ohio supplemental filing and motion for leave to file, March 19, 2021
20210319081851347_SCOTUS Motion for Leave to File Supp Brief re Intervention
AAPLObGyn supplemental filing and motion for leave to file, March 19, 2021
Ohio reply supporting intervention, March 19, 2021
20210319150728838_Reply ISO Intervention
AAPLObGyn reply supporting intervention, March 22, 2021
20210322130659907_2021.03.22 Reply in Support of Motion to Intervene with Declaration
Intervening on appeal to defend a prior Administration’s regulation (Supreme Court, Ninth Circuit)
SUPREME COURT AND NINTH CIRCUIT MOTION PRACTICE IN ONE OF THE PUBLIC CHARGE CASES, Nos. 20-449, 20-450, and 20-962; Nos. 19-17213, 19-17214, and 19-35044 (9th Cir.)
Stipulation to dismiss petition, March 9, 2021
20210309095806348_20-962 – USCIS v City and County of San Francisco Dismissal Stipulation
| Mar 09 2021 | Petition Dismissed – Rule 46. |
US notice re Cook County case and new policy, March 10, 2021
US letter re dismissal of petition, March 10, 2021
9C US letter re cert dismissal 3 10 21
Arizona motion to intervene, March 10, 2021
9C Arizona motion to intervene 3 10 21
South Carolina motion to join Arizona intervention, March 11, 2021
US opposition to intervention, March 22, 2021
Plaintiffs’ joint opposition to intervention, March 22, 2021
Intervening on appeal to defend a state law (case taken by the Supreme Court, March 29, 2021)
EMW Women’s Surgical Center v. Friedlander, No. 19-5516 (6th Cir.)
Sixth Circuit order denying intervention, June 24, 2020
Sixth Circuit order rejecting Cameron petition for rehearing en banc, July 16, 2020
6C order rejecting rheb petition
Cameron petition for cert, No. 20-601, October 30, 2020
20201030151534720_Cameron PFC Petition-1
Arizona et al brief in support, December 7, 2020
20201207135426780_20-601 Amici Brief States
Plaintiffs’ opposition to Cameron cert petition, February 5, 2021
20210205130341140_20-601 Cameron v EMW Women Surgical Center Brief in Opposition
Cameron reply, February 19, 2021
20210219152550103_20-601 Reply in Support of Cert
Order, No. 20-601, March 29, 2021
| Mar 29 2021 | Petition GRANTED limited to Question 1 presented by the petition. |
