The Trump administration had asked the Supreme Court in July to reinstate its historic approvals of state work requirements waivers. It contends that these rules may assist certain beneficiaries in transitioning to private policies and may result in improved health and to help states conserve financial resources to provide coverage to others in need.
MSN’s article entitled “Supreme Court agrees to consider Medicaid work requirements” reports that lower courts have struck down the Department of Health and Human Services’ approvals, holding that Medicaid’s primary purpose is to provide health care coverage.
The National Health Law Program, one of the consumer advocacy groups that brought the original lawsuits, said it thinks it will win at the Supreme Court.
“HHS’s action was properly vacated because Secretary [Alex] Azar failed to account for the significant loss in health coverage that these approvals would produce,” said Jane Perkins, legal director at the National Health Law Program. “Tens of thousands of people would lose their Medicaid coverage and become uninsured.”
The Supreme Court’s decision to take up the cases follows a panel of federal appellate judges that struck down the Trump administration’s approval of work requirements in Arkansas in February. The unanimous decision, written by Judge David Sentelle, a Reagan appointee, affirmed a district court ruling that found the administration had failed to analyze whether these programs would “promote the primary objective of Medicaid — to furnish medical assistance.”
New Hampshire stopped its roll-out of work requirements last year after the same district judge, James Boasberg in DC, set aside the administration’s approval in that state.
In an unprecedented step two years ago, the Trump administration started granting state requests to mandate that certain Medicaid beneficiaries work to receive benefits. Republicans have long wanted to have that requirement with Medicaid, which insures more than 75 million low-income Americans.
There were 12 states that received waivers, although four were set aside in court, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. Another seven state requests are awaiting federal approval. Work requirements are not in effect anywhere, after states stopped their efforts because of the legal rulings and the pandemic.
In Arkansas, more than 18,000 people lost coverage in 2018, before the court intervened. Judge Boasberg had also canceled Kentucky’s approval. That move blocked work requirements from being implemented in the state. However, Kentucky withdrew its waiver request after a Democratic governor won election in 2019 and dismissed its appeal.
The judge blocked work requirements in Michigan earlier this year.
Reference: MSN (Dec. 5, 2020) “Supreme Court agrees to consider Medicaid work requirements”
Suggested Key Terms: Elder Law Attorney, Medicaid, Paying for a Nursing Home, Medicaid Nursing Home Planning, Medicaid Planning Lawyer, Disability