Fact Check: Justice Gorsuch sets a sky-high bar for patients to sue under Section 1983.

Fact Check: "Justice Gorsuch sets a sky-high bar for patients to sue under Section 1983."

What We Know

The claim that Justice Gorsuch sets a "sky-high bar" for patients to sue under Section 1983 arises from recent Supreme Court rulings involving civil rights and Medicaid. In the case of Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, the Supreme Court ruled that Medicaid beneficiaries do not have the right to sue under Section 1983 when their access to Medicaid funds is denied. Justice Gorsuch, writing for a 6-3 majority, emphasized that Section 1983 permits private plaintiffs to sue for violations of federal spending-power statutes only if Congress has explicitly conferred such rights (source-1, source-3).

In another case involving a nursing home resident, the Supreme Court declined to limit the right to sue government workers under Section 1983, affirming that individuals can sue for violations of their rights under federal statutes, including the Federal Nursing Home Reform Act (source-2). This ruling indicates that the Court is not setting an excessively high bar for all patients but is rather clarifying the conditions under which Section 1983 can be invoked.

Analysis

The assertion that Justice Gorsuch has established a "sky-high bar" is misleading. While it is true that the ruling in Medina restricts the ability of Medicaid beneficiaries to sue, it does not universally apply to all patients or all circumstances under Section 1983. The ruling specifically addresses the need for Congress to clearly articulate rights that can be enforced through this statute (source-3, source-5).

Critics argue that Gorsuch's interpretation effectively narrows the scope of Section 1983, making it more challenging for individuals to seek redress for violations of their rights. For instance, in his opinion, Gorsuch stated that if Congress intended to allow lawsuits under Section 1983, it must explicitly use the term "right" in its legislation (source-7). This perspective has been criticized as setting an impractical standard for patients seeking to enforce their rights.

However, the ruling in the nursing home case demonstrates that the Court is still open to allowing lawsuits under Section 1983 when rights are clearly defined by federal law (source-2). This indicates a nuanced approach rather than a blanket imposition of high barriers for all patients.

Conclusion

Verdict: False
The claim that Justice Gorsuch sets a "sky-high bar" for patients to sue under Section 1983 is inaccurate. While recent rulings have clarified the conditions under which Section 1983 can be invoked, they do not impose an excessively high standard for all patients. The rulings reflect a need for clarity in congressional intent regarding enforceable rights, rather than an outright barrier to legal recourse for individuals.

Sources

1. 23-1275 Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic
2. Supreme Court rules for nursing home patient's family, declines to ...
3. The Most Fearful Part of the Supreme Court's Planned Parenthood Ruling
4. Justices nix suit to lift Planned Parenthood Medicaid exclusion
5. Supreme Court joins the Republican War on Planned Parenthood by ...