By Liz Nass
Gongwer News Service
Attorney General Dana Nessel won a ruling against President Donald Trump’s administration to reverse new Medicaid work requirements a coalition of states said would be harmful to medically frail individuals.
The U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts ruled on a lawsuit filed by 24 states back in June that the Trump administration's Medicaid work requirements under the federal budget bill is unlawful in its new interpretation of key terms like “medically frail” that would make it harder for medically frail patients to be excused from the work requirements.
The court held the definition of medical frailty was contrary to the law, calling on the language to be vacated, issuing a permanent injunction and giving the federal government a six-month stay on enforcement to accommodate any errors or delays that could result due to implementation of the old language.
“The court’s decision is a clear check on this administration, reinforcing that protections for the medically vulnerable cannot be brushed aside,” Nessel said in a statement. “People who are seriously ill or living with disabilities should not have to fight through a maze of paperwork to keep the insurance coverage they need. My office will continue to defend the law, protect our residents, and keep eligible people from losing coverage over unnecessary red tape.”
While Congress had enacted exemptions from the work requirements to ensure people with serious illnesses and disabilities did not lose their coverage, the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services created an interim rule that in addition to the language changes added administrative burdens and did not give states clear or workable guidance, the Department of Attorney General said.
Gongwer News Service
Attorney General Dana Nessel won a ruling against President Donald Trump’s administration to reverse new Medicaid work requirements a coalition of states said would be harmful to medically frail individuals.
The U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts ruled on a lawsuit filed by 24 states back in June that the Trump administration's Medicaid work requirements under the federal budget bill is unlawful in its new interpretation of key terms like “medically frail” that would make it harder for medically frail patients to be excused from the work requirements.
The court held the definition of medical frailty was contrary to the law, calling on the language to be vacated, issuing a permanent injunction and giving the federal government a six-month stay on enforcement to accommodate any errors or delays that could result due to implementation of the old language.
“The court’s decision is a clear check on this administration, reinforcing that protections for the medically vulnerable cannot be brushed aside,” Nessel said in a statement. “People who are seriously ill or living with disabilities should not have to fight through a maze of paperwork to keep the insurance coverage they need. My office will continue to defend the law, protect our residents, and keep eligible people from losing coverage over unnecessary red tape.”
While Congress had enacted exemptions from the work requirements to ensure people with serious illnesses and disabilities did not lose their coverage, the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services created an interim rule that in addition to the language changes added administrative burdens and did not give states clear or workable guidance, the Department of Attorney General said.
––––––––––––––––––––
Subscribe to the Legal News!
https://www.legalnews.com/Home/Subscription
Full access to public notices, articles, columns, archives, statistics, calendar and more
Day Pass Only $4.95!
One-County $80/year
Three-County & Full Pass also available
