State ex rel. Cleveland Right to Life v. State of Ohio Controlling Bd.
138 Ohio St. 3d 57
| Ohio | 2013Background
- Relators seek writs of mandamus and prohibition to challenge the Ohio Controlling Board’s approval of increased Medicaid fund spending for Group VIII under PPACA expansion.
- Governor Kasich vetoed a provision prohibiting Group VIII coverage; after veto, enrolled statutes permitted coverage unless prohibited by statute.
- CMS approved Ohio’s plan amendment to cover Group VIII on October 10, 2013; the Controlling Board approved a related funding increase on October 21, 2013; all funding involved is federal, not state money.
- Controlling Board authority rests on R.C. 131.35 and R.C. 127.17, with the latter requiring conformity to the General Assembly’s prevailing appropriation acts and legislative intent.
- Relators allege the Board exceeded authority by authorizing expenditure contrary to the General Assembly’s intent; the court denies relief and dismisses the writs.
- Note: Dissent argues this is a political question and not justiciable, but the majority rejects that formulation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the Controlling Board violate R.C. 127.17 by approving Group VIII funding despite legislative intent? | Relators contend 5163.04 forbade Group VIII; prevailing act shows intent. | Board acted within authority; vetoed changes and enacting language do not bind Board to pre-veto intent. | No violation; writ denied. |
| Does Controlling Board have authority under R.C. 131.35(A)(2) or (A)(5) to authorize expenditure of excess federal funds for Medicaid? | Authority limited to prior appropriation modifications, not new PPACA expansions. | Expenditure of excess federal funds authorized; (A)(5) supports participation in federal program. | Authorized under either provision; Board validly approved funding. |
| Is judicial review appropriate for a dispute over legislative policy within a political question? | Not applicable here; majority declines to treat as political question. |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Waters v. Spaeth, 131 Ohio St.3d 55 (Ohio 2012) (mandamus standard; clear rights and duties; adequate remedy)
- Natl. Fedn. of Indep. Bus. v. Sebelius, 132 S. Ct. 2566 (U.S. 2012) (upheld individual mandate; curtailed use of subsidies to force expansion)
- Schweiker v. Gray Panthers, 453 U.S. 34 (U.S. 1981) (discussed Medicaid expansion and federal role)
- Patterson Foundry & Machine Co. v. Ohio River Power Co., 99 Ohio St. 429 (Ohio 1919) (constitutional checks on legislature via veto and appropriation)
- Grendell v. Davidson, 86 Ohio St.3d 629 (Ohio 1999) (nonjusticiable political questions/mandamus limits)