There is no time like now to let go of old ways of doing things and welcome new ways of supporting what’s best for everyone.
Choosing to NOT do something, like this lawsuit, is what is best for all our communities. #pullthepetition
Council adopted a Special Resolution opposing the petition of the Health and Hospital Corporation of Marion County to the U.S. Supreme Court, Case No. 21-806, and seeks its dismissal.
When Susie Talevski of Valparaiso, Indiana, sued the agency that managed her elderly father’s care before he died, she hoped to get justice for her family
She didn’t expect the case would grow into a national bellwether https://t.co/UZtDsZWIsv
One legal expert previously told IndyStar Health & Hospital's case in front of the Supreme Court is as monumental for Medicaid as the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization was for abortion. https://t.co/u9oftMANpt
Plus HHC Board didn’t even vote to go to SCOTUS.
A rogue CEO appears to have ignored Indiana law requiring the Board to hold a public vote on the matter.
Here is info on that: https://t.co/yohP52vw8U
There is no time like now to let go of old ways of doing things and welcome new ways of supporting what’s best for everyone.
Choosing to NOT do something, like this lawsuit, is what is best for all our communities. #pullthepetition
Council adopted a Special Resolution opposing the petition of the Health and Hospital Corporation of Marion County to the U.S. Supreme Court, Case No. 21-806, and seeks its dismissal.
We are still organizing and mobilizing to convince HHC - a publicly owned municipal corporation - to #PullThePetition
Indy Council is one of 3 bodies (Indy Mayor and County Commissioners, also) that appoint members to the HHC Board.
NDRN is gravely concerned by the implications of a ruling against the rights of individuals who receive Medicaid in the case of the Health & Hospital Corporation of Marion County, Indiana (HHC) v. Talevski heard today by the U.S. Supreme Court. (1/5)
#Talevski
OMFG. the pet'r's lawyer just told KBJ: "an old prof of mine wrote a book that said an odd answer to the wrong question [is bad or something] ... respectfully, that's the wrong question"
this is ... quite an approach to take at a #SCOTUS argument (& KBJ does *not* sound amused).
Note to everyone- if a judge asks you a question, it's the right question. If a Supreme Court justice asks you a question, it's the right question. #AppellateTwitter
@ShiraWakschlag So, Robbins conceded in the end on the question of HHC’s consent to the contract.
Did I misunderstand that part? That he conceded the opposite of his argument in the beginning about consent?