24 States Sue Health Department Over Grant Terminations

Nick Brown, the Attorney General of Washington State, recently teamed up with counterparts from a total of 24 states to bring a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and its Secretary, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. The central grievance is the allegedly abrupt and unlawful cessation of $11 billion in crucial public health grants meant for the states.

The decision to terminate these grant funds came without any prior notice or a legally acceptable rationale. The fallout from this sudden move has created a challenging situation for the state health agencies. These entities heavily depend on these vital funds to fuel a multitude of pressing public health necessities.

These grants, for instance, contributed greatly to services as vital as addressing infectious diseases, enhancing emergency preparedness, supporting mental health and substance abuse services, and upgrading the infrastructure for public health. The termination of these grants will unquestionably have far-reaching effects, particularly in the state of Washington.

The office of Attorney General Brown has quantified the potential financial harm to Washington State. They estimated that the state could lose more than $159 million due to the grant cancellations made by HHS. This monetary loss could seriously undermine the ability of Washington to respond effectively to crucial health issues.

The attorney general voiced his disappointment, saying, ‘We cannot reinstate national health by exacerbating preventable diseases.’ Brown criticized the administration harshly for this course of action, saying it not only possesses legal issues but also contributes to negligence towards the severe public health challenges such as substance abuse and mental health crises that the nation is grappling with.

Future implications were also stressed by Brown’s office, which anticipates major disruptions to the state’s public health programs and initiatives if the situation does not improve. Should the funds not be reinstated, many vital health initiatives would be severely impacted or even brought to a halt.

Through filing the lawsuit, the coalition of states has a clear objective – to obtain a temporary restraining order to nullify these mass grant terminations by HHS and Secretary Kennedy in the states that are filing the lawsuit. The group argues that these actions blatantly breach the norms set out in the Administrative Procedure Act.

Beyond this, the states are also going a step further by calling on the court to prevent the HHS from keeping these terminations in place or reinstating them. They have also pushed for a bar on any agency interventions that would seek to implement these terminations.

As part of this coalition, Brown stands alongside Attorneys General from a host of other states. These include Colorado, Rhode Island, California, Minnesota, Arizona, Delaware, D.C., a region in the capital, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, and Wisconsin.

Moreover, this move isn’t just supported by Attorneys General. Governors, particularly of Kentucky and Pennsylvania, are also standing up to the HHS by joining this legal battle. These concurring voices add weight to the protest against the grant terminations and their potential impact on public health.

Indeed, the legal action encapsulates the urgency felt by state officials regarding important public health funds. The reactive measures of HHS, delivered without prior notice or reasonable cause, have resulted in states collectively seeking recourse in the court. The hope is to rectify the situation rapidly before any lasting damage occurs to their public health services and infrastructure.

The collective strength of 24 states, all siding against the abrupt termination of vital public health grants, speaks volumes about the nationwide importance attributed to this issue. All of these entities are demanding that the health of the American people not be compromised due to disagreements with or within the administration.

The overarching goal of this lawsuit is to resecure the lost funding and ensure that no American state has to compromise its public health services. By doing so, they aim to uphold the health and wellbeing of the American public, ensuring every individual has access to the highest standard of health services, regardless of where they reside in the nation.