Constitutional Accountability Center Constitutional Accountability Center
Access to Justice

Supreme Court Closes Courthouse Door To Important Medicaid Lawsuits

Washington, DC – On news today that the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a divided ruling in Armstrong v. Exceptional Child Center, Inc., Constitutional Accountability Center released the following reaction:

 

CAC Civil Rights Director David Gans said, “Make no mistake, the practical effects of this ruling are enormous for ordinary Americans. The Court today turned its back on the principle of access to our federal courts, leaving low income people seeking access to health care to the vagaries and limitations of the executive branch.”

 

CAC Appellate Counsel Brianne Gorod continued, “Unfortunately, this case is just the latest in a long line of Roberts Court cases that bend over backwards to allow corporations to enforce federal rights, while closing the courthouse doors to ordinary Americans and minorities seeking to enforce theirs. That said, one silver lining of today’s decision is that all members of the Court recognized that there is a long history of the right to go to federal court to redress unlawful state action. Hopefully at least some members of the Court will remember that history and strike the balance in favor of court access in future rulings.”

 

#

 

Additional Resources:

 

CAC’s “friend of the court” brief in Armstrong v. Exceptional Child Center, Inc.: http://theusconstitution.org/sites/default/files/briefs/Armstrong_v_Exceptional_Child_Center_14-15_CAC_Amicus.pdf

 

“Can Plaintiffs Be Denied Their Day in Court Because a Remedy is Costly?: The Supreme Court Hears Oral Argument in Armstrong v. Exceptional Child Center, Inc.,” David H. Gans, January 22, 2015: http://theusconstitution.org/text-history/3068/can-plaintiffs-be-denied-their-day-court-because-remedy-costly-supreme-court-hears 

 

Roberts at 10: Roberts’s Consistent Votes to Close the Courthouse Doors, Brianne Gorod: http://theusconstitution.org/sites/default/files/briefs/Roberts-at-10-Access-to-the-Courts.pdf 

 

##

 

Constitutional Accountability Center (www.theusconstitution.org) is a think tank, public interest law firm, and action center dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text and history.

 

###

More from Access to Justice

Voting Rights and Democracy
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Nairne v. Landry

In Nairne v. Landry, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit is considering whether the Voting Rights Act’s prohibition on vote dilution is a constitutional exercise of Congress’s Fifteenth Amendment enforcement power.
Voting Rights and Democracy
 

United States v. Paxton

In United States v. Paxton, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit is considering whether the Materiality Provision in the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits states from denying the right...
Voting Rights and Democracy
 

Mi Familia Vota v. Petersen

In Mi Familia Vota v. Petersen, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is considering whether requiring voters to include their birthplace on voter registration forms violates the Materiality Provision of the...
Rule of Law
 

Iowa v. SEC

In Iowa v. SEC, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit is considering the legality of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s new climate-related disclosure requirements.
Rule of Law
 

Chamber of Commerce v. CFPB

In Chamber of Commerce v. CFPB, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit is considering the legality of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s update to its Examination Manual clarifying that discrimination may...
Rule of Law
 

Lackey v. Stinnie

In Lackey v. Stinnie, the Supreme Court is considering when a civil rights plaintiff is entitled to attorney’s fees as the “prevailing party” in a case.