Heckler, Secretary of Health and Human Services v. Lopez Et Al.

Background

A class of people whose Social Security disability payments were stopped sued the federal health agency and won a preliminary injunction in a California district court. That injunction required the agency to notify people terminated since August 30, 1981 (or August 25, 1980 for some) that they could reapply and to reinstate benefits while hearings proceeded, where the agency would have to show medical improvement. Justice Rehnquist, acting as Circuit Justice, temporarily paused that part of the order while the agency appealed to the Court of Appeals.

Reasoning

The Supreme Court declined to overturn Justice Rehnquist’s pause and left the temporary stay in place, stressing deference to a Circuit Justice’s decision but acknowledging that reexamination can sometimes be appropriate. The legal dispute focused on whether the district court had authority to order relief for all class members under the statute that lets individuals seek judicial review within sixty days of a final agency decision. Lower courts had found that many class members met the timing and exhaustion requirements, but the Court left the pause while those questions are resolved on appeal.

Real world impact

The effect is that interim reinstatement of benefits remains suspended for many people whose payments were cut, so they may not receive immediate relief even though lower courts found serious hardship. This order is not a final ruling on the merits or on the Ninth Circuit’s evidence rule; the situation could change on appeal or in later proceedings.

Dissents or concurrances

Two Justices dissented: one would have limited the pause so people with recent terminations could get interim benefits, and another would have lifted the pause entirely, emphasizing severe harms to disabled claimants.