In The News
NSCLC Executive Director Kevin Prindiville calls on Congress in his latest Huffington Post blog to act to update the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program to help low-income seniors like Dollie.
NSCLC Directing Attorney Eric Carlson is quoted in a Nov. 19, 2014 article in Governing concerning Medicaid reimbursement for care outside nursing homes.
Dollie, 73, lives solely on income from Supplemental Social Security for all of her living expenses. But the program needs an update. Watch Dollie’s story and then help NSCLC restore this important poverty program.
NSCLC on Twitter
Use this toolkit with state-specific stats on how #AHCA would hurt seniors to tweet at your Senators… https://t.co/Qn6HB1rvMc(about 2170 days ago)
#CAbudget - restore SSI/SSP funding & COLA for seniors & ppl w/ disabilities #HollyJMitchell #PhilTing #CA4SSI #SSI https://t.co/UvHWhxeGMF(about 2177 days ago)
Tell Congress it wasn't OK to destroy health care before recess, and it isn't OK now. Call 855-534-1504. https://t.co/2ZmnRJLMiv(about 2226 days ago)
tract: While prior scholarship has noted changes in §1983 jurisprudence, this article demonstrates that the current state of the law reflects the transformation of dissents, particularly the dissent written by Justice O’Connor in 1987, into a majority opinion in 2002. The hostility of several Justices to §1983 can be traced to the policy arguments advanced by Justice Rehnquist in his dissents from the 1970s. The 35 years of acrimony over §1983 contrast sharply with the harmony with which the Court has approached federal preemption, which has been acknowledged by numerous Justices, including Rehnquist and Kennedy, as a viable alternative to litigating under § 1983. Post-2002 cases from Courts of Appeals have embraced preemption as a vehicle for reaching the merits in safety net cases, including cases in which §1983 does not provide a cause of action. This article also critiques the separate opinions of Justices Scalia and Thomas which have sought to limit the use of preemption to serve the interests of business and deny low-income individuals the full protection of federal law. Read Section 1983 and Preemption.
This entry was posted in Articles and tagged Court Access, Preemption. Bookmark the permalink.