Claim: Disability rights advocates sue Montana over Medicaid cuts.
Verdict: SUPPORTS

Retrieved passages:
title: Baxter v. Montana
text: scholars, thirty-one Montana state legislators and bioethicists, among others. Among the groups filing amicus briefs on behalf of the state were the Alliance Defense Fund on behalf of the Family Research Council, Americans United for Life, the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, disability rights group Not Dead Yet, and the Catholic Medical Association. The Montana Medical Association issued a statement opposing physician-assisted suicide, but refused to file an "amicus brief" in the appeal. On Dec. 31, 2009, the Montana Supreme Court ruled in favor of Baxter. Although they did not address the constitutional question, they ruled on narrower

title: John Morrison (Montana politician)
text: expansion of children's health coverage. In the first year of operation, it brought over $200 million in new federal matching dollars into Montana and covered 10,000 additional children. Healthy Montana Kids now covers 91,000 Montana Children. As Insurance Commissioner, Morrison banned "discretionary clauses" in group health and disability insurance plans and successfully defended the ban at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in "Standard Ins. Co v. Morrison", 584 F. 3d 837 (2009). Through the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC), Morrison led passage of a similar model law that has been adopted in more than a

title: Terri Schiavo case
text: and co-authored the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act. American disability rights groups traditionally tend to ally themselves with Democrats and the political left; however, in the Schiavo case, they joined pro-life organizations in opposing the removal of her feeding tube and supporting the Palm Sunday Compromise. According to Marilyn Golden, Harkin's support was necessary for passage of the bill, as any voice opposition by Democrats would have delayed it. As in the state courts, all of the Schindlers' federal petitions and appeals were denied, and the U.S. Supreme Court declined to grant certiorari, effectively ending the Schindlers' judicial options. At

title: Baxter v. Montana
text: is authorized. The others are California, Colorado, Oregon, Washington, Hawaii and Vermont: it is authorized in the District of Columbia as well. The original lawsuit was brought by four Montana physicians (Stephen Speckart, C. Paul Loehnen, Lar Autio, and George Risi, Jr., M.D.s), Compassion & Choices and Robert Baxter, a seventy-six-year-old truck driver from Billings, Montana, who was dying of lymphocytic leukemia. The plaintiffs asked the court to confirm a constitutional right "to receive and provide aid in dying". The state argued that "the Constitution confers no right to aid in ending one’s life." Judge Dorothy McCarter, of Montana's First

title: Fairness Project
text: a Montana ballot to extend the previously temporary expanded Medicaid provision failed to pass. The first lost campaign out of the Project's targets, the ballot campaign set a record for the most expensive ever fought in the USA. This was due to the funding provisions of the proposal, which placed additional taxes on tobacco products. As well as significant funding from the Project and other like-minded donors in favour, the tobacco industry spend $17,000,000 campaigning in opposition. The Montana legislature has stated they will debate the program in January. The primary other issue handled by the Fairness Project to date

title: Jennifer Velez
text: secure a waiver for a Medicaid overhaul in the state in 2012. The advocacy group Disability Rights New Jersey filed two major lawsuits filed against the state of New Jersey. The group accused the state of improperly segregating people with mental illnesses developmental disabilities. Velez was also criticized for the closing of two developmental centers and a psychiatric hospital which she oversaw. Critics of the closings, including disability advocates and family members of patients, argued the process was rushed and influenced by politics. In February 2015, Velez announced she would be leaving her post as Commissioner at the end of

title: Coons v. Geithner
text: treatments." Because these decisions cannot be reviewed by Congress nor the courts, the lawsuit claimed that the separation of powers doctrine is violated as a result of the health care legislation. In addition, thirty Arizona lawmakers joined the suit because they believed the bill violates their First Amendment rights to cast votes for the benefit of their constituents. For example, in 2010, the Arizona Legislature sought to reduce the state's budget deficits by voting to reduce state funding for Medicaid. However, after the federal health care bill was passed, the Legislature had to restore all state funding for Medicaid or

title: Benefis Health System
text: psychiatric and chemical dependency services. Benefis also said it would lose several million dollars a year in federal payments as well. On March 24, the injunction was lifted. Benefis filed an emergency motion with the Montana Supreme Court three days later, appealing the district court's ruling. The state of Montana then issued a six-month provisional license to Central Montana to operate as a general hospital. But on October 4, 2006, the Montana Supreme Court ruled 4-to-3 to uphold the district court's dismissal of the temporary injunction. However, the state supreme court declined to rule on other issues raised by Benefis'

title: Mark Brnovich
text: for Individuals with Disabilities from filing new lawsuits in September 2016. In December of that year the office filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuits. A judge granted the Attorney General's office request in February 2017, dismissing over 1,000 of the lawsuits. After the successful action by his office, Brnovich remarked: "Arizona is not going to tolerate serial litigators who try to shake down small hardworking businesses by exploiting the disability community." On September 8, 2017, Brnovich sued the Arizona Board of Regents, saying the entity in charge of setting tuition for Arizona universities had "dramatically and unconstitutionally" increased tuition

title: Terri Schiavo case
text: feeding tubes. In a landmark ruling, the Florida Supreme Court decided that Browning had "the constitutional right to choose or refuse medical treatment, and that right extends to all relevant decisions concerning one's health". During the years of legal proceedings, disability rights groups and activists closely monitored and involved themselves in the case. In March 2003, twelve disability rights groups, led by Not Dead Yet, along with four other amici, filed an amicus curiae brief in which they opposed the removal of Schiavo's feeding tube. They also used the Schiavo case to advocate for federal review in cases where third

title: Meyer v. Astrue
text: evidence that the Appeals Council "specifically incorporated. In the end, Judge Dana L. Christensen of the United States District Court, D. Montana, Missoula Division agreed with Judge Lynch and upheld the magistrate's decision and denied Meyer's claim. Meyer v. Astrue Meyer v. Astrue, 662 F.3d 700 (4th Cir. 2011) was a landmark Social Security Disability Insurance case argued in Federal Court, resolving a conflict within the Circuit over the summary denial of requests for review when new evidence is submitted to the Appeals Council. After suffering severe injuries in an accidental fall, Maurice Eugene Meyer applied for Social Security Disability

title: Baxter v. Montana
text: Judicial District Court, ruled in favor of the plaintiffs on December 5, 2008, stating that the "constitutional rights of individual privacy and human dignity, taken together, encompass the right of a competent terminally-ill patient to die with dignity." Baxter died that same day. The Montana Attorney General appealed the case to the state supreme court. Oral arguments were heard on September 2, 2009. Amicus briefs filed on behalf of those asking the court to grant the constitutional right to receive/provide aid in dying include human rights groups, women's rights groups, The American Medical Women's Association/American Medical Students Association, clergy, legal

title: Disabled People Against Cuts
text: times harder than non-disabled people. DPAC oppose all austerity measures which are currently heavily impacting disabled people in the UK. These include the closure of the Independent Living Fund, Personal Independence Payment (replacing Disability Living Allowance), Employment and Support Allowance, the Children and Families Bill 2013 and the 'Bedroom tax'. Ellen Clifford, of DPAC, explained the tactics used by the anti-cuts group in the Guardian, saying "No one who cares about social justice can work with a government that is intent on dismantling the welfare state, so disabled activists are having to find other means to try to stop what

title: Mary Caferro
text: justice organization made up of people who are low-income. Mary Caferro Mary M. Caferro is a Democratic Party member of the Montana Senate. In 2010 she was elected to Senate District 40, representing Helena, Montana. She was a member of the Montana House of Representatives, representing District 80 from 2004-10. The mother of four children, Caferro is currently the director of The Arc Montana. The Arc promotes and protects the human rights of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities and actively supports their full inclusion and participation in the community throughout their lifetimes. Caferro was Director of WEEL, Working for

title: Mark Brnovich
text: August 2016 the Arizona Attorney General's office took action in Maricopa County Superior Court and filed to intervene in over 1,000 lawsuits from an "advocacy" group that flooded courts with "copy and paste" disability access lawsuits targeting mostly small businesses. By intervening, the Attorney General's office made itself a part of the cases and argued that group, "Advocates for Individuals with Disabilities," exceeded their legal authority and that the group was not allowed to collect fees on these types of lawsuits. A judge agreed to allow the Attorney General's office to intervene and consolidated the cases while also preventing Advocates

title: Arkansas Department of Human Services v. Ahlborn
text: Arkansas Department of Human Services v. Ahlborn Arkansas Department of Human Services v. Ahlborn, 547 U.S. 268 (2006), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States involving the ability of a state agency to claim a personal injury settlement as compensation for Medicaid benefits provided for treatment of the injuries. The Court ruled unanimously that a federal statutory prohibition against liens on personal property to recover Medicaid expenditures applied to settlements, so that only the portion of the settlement that represented payment for past medical expenses could be claimed by the state. Heidi Ahlborn, a resident of

title: Arkansas Department of Human Services v. Ahlborn
text: the extent they provided for a contrary result. The opinion is also significant because the Court, without discussion, permitted a Medicaid suit to proceed where the cause of action was conferred by the Supremacy Clause. Most federal suits alleging violation of the Medicaid Act – which does not expressly confer a right of action – claim that the right of action is authorized by 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In recent years, the Supreme Court has made it more difficult to sue under § 1983 for statutory violations, requiring that the statutory provision in question unmistakably focus on individual rights. While

title: Brian Morris (judge)
text: wrote the 4–1 decision in "Wilson v. Montana" that denying an inmate the use of a particular mental illness medication did not violate the criminal's rights. On March 11, 2013, Senator Max Baucus announced that he will recommend that President Obama nominate Morris to fill the vacancy on the United States District Court for the District of Montana caused by Judge Sam Haddon taking senior status, the vacant seat being located in Great Falls. The recommendation was made after a number of candidates were considered by a nine-member Judicial Nominating Commission appointed by Senator Baucus and Senator Jon Tester. On

title: Baxter v. Montana
text: Baxter v. Montana Baxter v. Montana, is a Montana Supreme Court case, argued on September 2, 2009, and decided on December 31, 2009, that addressed the question of whether the state's constitution guaranteed terminally ill patients a right to lethal prescription medication from their physicians. The Montana Supreme Court sidestepped the question of if medical aid in dying is guaranteed under Montana State Constitution, but it instead ruled, on narrower grounds, that neither legal precedent nor the state's statute deem such assistance to be against public policy or illegal. Montana is one of seven states in which aid in dying

title: Anders Blewett
text: include House Bill 315 which reduces taxes for low income retirees on pensions and “The Fair Arbitrators Act” which reforms Montana’s arbitration process by requiring arbitrators to make enhanced disclosures relating to conflicts of interest and prior arbitrations. Blewett was also a co-sponsor of the 2009 Montana Stream Access Law. The law, which protects the public's right to access Montana's rivers and streams from public bridges, was widely viewed as one of the most important bills passed in the 2009 legislature. Since his election in 2008, Blewett has advocated for the removal of BNSF railcars from Montana's Missouri River corridor.