Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
The grassroots effort is remaining hopeful and continuing to pressure the Health & Hospital Corporation of Marion County to withdraw its case pending before the U.S. Supreme Court, which is feared as potentially harming the elderly, the disabled and the very young.
Hoosier Action organized a rally Nov. 14 in downtown Indianapolis with disability, faith and nonprofit leaders along with recipients of public benefit programs to again call upon HHC to pull its petition in HHC, et al. v. Talevski, 21-806. Oral arguments were heard Nov. 8, when and the Supreme Court appeared skeptical of the case presented by HHC and the state of Indiana.
Still, the only way to ensure the justices do not issue an unfavorable ruling is for HHC to withdraw.
“We’re cautiously optimistic anything can happen,” Tracey Hutchings-Goetz, communications and policy director of Hoosier Action, said. She acknowledged the HHC board of directors would have to make the decision to pull the petition, but the rally called upon Indianapolis Mayor Joe Hogsett to advocate against the case.
“He appointed quite a few members of the board and is a political and community leader in this city,” Hutchings-Goetz said. “So we really hope that he will stand with us. We believe that it is possible for people to change their mind and for people to understand that the case can still be dropped.”
A series of speakers took turns at the podium on the Richard G. Lugar Plaza in front of the City-County Building. They warned of the outcome if HHC wins its case, while a sizeable group stood behind holding signs that read, “Not Ashamed to Need Care.”
“We say to (Hogsett) that as an attorney, you know that Health and Hospital Corporation is providing the Supreme Court with a platform to issue a ruling that would make it very difficult to hold the government accountable for violating the rights of people who depend on federally-funded safety net programs,” Rev. David Greene, of Concerned Clergy of Indianapolis, said. “… To Mayor Joe Hogsett, the board and the leadership of Health and Hospital, we say, ‘It’s not too late to do the right thing. Listen to the concerns of your community and advocates around the country and withdraw your petition.’”
Previously, Hogsett had asked HHC to focus only on the question concerning Talevksi’s treatment, according to the Indianapolis Star.
The case has nonprofits and aid organizations across the nation fearful that the U.S. Supreme Court will find private citizens cannot file lawsuits under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to enforce the requirements of federal benefits programs like Medicaid, Medicare and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. Removing the ability to seek a judicial remedy, the groups say, would put the elderly, the disabled and the infirmed at risk of not receiving proper care or support.
Lucas Waterfill receives Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. He told the crowd his benefits are a matter of life and death.
“What they’re doing to us is saying, ‘The vulnerable don’t matter; the most unhealthy don’t matter; the elderly don’t matter; the disabled don’t matter. What matters to us is profit,’” Waterfill said of HHC. “… What should matter is health care. What should matter is us having the right to stand up against the state and fight for rights for health care.”
Skepticism and fear
Even if HHC does withdraw its petition, the Section 1983 question could still come before the Supreme Court this term. A case from South Carolina is poised to present the same issue to the nine justices.
Yet Morgan Daly of the Indiana Statewide Independent Living Council is undeterred.
“I think we have to defend what we have in front of us,” Daly said, “and try to make sure that Indiana’s reputation is not ‘the state that destroyed civil rights.’”
Originally, a complaint was filed in the Indiana Northern District Court on behalf of Gorgi Talevski, a resident of Valparaiso Care and Rehabilitation Center. The lawsuit alleges the nursing home did not provide proper medical care in violation of the Federal Nursing Home Reform Act.
In going before the Supreme Court, the case has been expanded to question whether any private right of action can be filed under Section 1983 to enforce spending clause statutes.
During oral arguments, Indiana Solicitor General Thomas M. Fisher used his time to try to convince the Supreme Court to find for HHC on both questions to provide clarity to the lower courts. He told the justices they should finished what was started in Gonzaga University v. Doe, 536 U.S. 273 (2002), and hold that private citizens cannot enforce federal spending conditions unless Congress gives express permission to do so.
However, the justices seemed skeptical.
Chief Justice John Roberts, who represented Gonzaga University in the 2002 case, said the Supreme Court had “imposed a pretty high bar” in Gonzaga in terms of the evidence required to show Congress intended a private enforceable right. Justice Amy Coney Barrett asked if the confusion would not be cleared by telling the lower courts they should look to Gonzaga because it is more recent and laid down a stricter standard.
Fisher replied that states would still be coming with “case after case after case asking for clarification.”
Justice Sonia Sotomayor joined by asking, “So why don’t you bring us a case where the right is more ambiguous? This case doesn’t seem to present that confusion that you seem to be referring to.”
At the rally, the focus was on the potential consequences of an HHC victory.
“There are over 300,000 people here just in Marion County that rely on Medicaid,” Pike Township Trustee Annette Johnson told the crowd. “As a trustee in Indianapolis, I see how Medicaid is a crucial safety net program for our Pike Township families. I do whatever I can to ensure that our families that need help get their bills paid, have enough to eat and have a warm place to live. We cannot have another portion of something that would bring harm to them.”•
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.