In Doyle v. Tidball, ___ S.W.3d ___, No. SC 99185, 2021 WL 3119116 (Mo. July 22, 2012), the Missouri Supreme Court unanimously held that the effect of the plain language of the voters' State Constitutional Amendment requires equal protection if the Missouri Legislature appropriates any money for Medicaid (as it must under other requirements of law).
The Missouri State Constitution Medicaid Expansion Amendment extends the eligibility of Medicaid in Missouri. It does not affect the appropriation of funds, the Court ruled.
However, the funds that have been appropriated (so far) by the Missouri Legislature are intended to be applied equally -- even if the funds appropriated are inadequate to the task.
The Court ruled that "the plain language of the purposes stated [in the appropriations bills is] to fund MO HealthNet without distinguishing between benefits provided to individuals who are eligible as part of the pre-expansion population and those eligible only under article IV, section 36(c) [the Missouri State Constitution Medicaid Expansion Amendment]." Doyle v. Tidball, 2021 WL 3119116, at *6.
That's how Medicaid Expansion was upheld in Missouri: The Missouri Supreme Court rejected any notion that the Missouri Legislature attempt to impose inequality in health care in a pandemic.
That's the rest of the -- real -- story here. Much has been written about the Missouri Supreme Court's decision in the popular press, but I have not seen this published anywhere else as yet.
Please read the disclaimer. ©2021 Dennis J. Wall. All rights reserved.
Comments