Courts & the Law, News

Federal judge agrees to delay Medicaid expansion litigation

A federal judge on Friday agreed to temporarily halt litigation related to Gov. Roy Cooper’s attempts to expand Medicaid.

The stay will expire March 31, at which time the state and federal Department of Health and Human Services will be required to respond to the original complaint, and Republican legislators who filed that complaint will have to inform the court if a dispute still exists.

House Speaker Tim Moore and Senate President Pro Tem Phil Berger filed the lawsuit earlier this month against the state and federal Department of Health and Human Services to stop Cooper from expanding Medicaid altogether. They were granted a temporary restraining order, which was granted but still a point of dispute before the court after defendants filed a motion to vacate the order.

Earlier this week, Moore and Berger filed a joint motion along with the federal Department of Health and Human Services (which is now under President Donald Trump’s control) to delay litigation for 60 days so that the new presidential administration could evaluate the issues of the case.

It was explained in that motion that the federal department agreed with the legislators not to process any request from North Carolina to expand Medicaid for 89 days.

The state department asked the federal court to dismiss the case altogether for lack of jurisdiction because it’s a state issue.

Judge Louise Wood Flanagan said in her order to delay litigation that the stay hinges on the following:

  1. Unless some objection be raised within seven days hereof causing the court to alter this determination, defendants’ response deadline to the complaint is March 31, 2017, which also is the deadline for the parties’ report alerting as to what disputes if any remain, and such other matters as the parties determine efficient to report;
  2. Should a defendant file a responsive motion in advance of the March 31, 2017, deadline, unless good cause be shown within seven days of service of the motion why response, if any, to said motion should be delayed, response shall be due in the regular course, subject to the court’s local civil rules concerning motions practice;
  3. Any response by the federal defendants to plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction shall be due no later than April 7, 2017. The state defendants shall have five days within which to comment on the record upon their co- defendants’ submission. Then, plaintiffs shall have five days to make their reply to defendants; and
  4. The state defendants shall file a copy of any proposal indicating date of the federal defendants’ receipt of same with the court.

One Comment


  1. Sylvia Freeman

    January 28, 2017 at 11:34 am

    I just don’t get why anyone is against expanding Medicaid. It only helps many residents of our state.

Check Also

Superior Court judges hire lobbyists; merit selection plan could be unveiled by end of October

The North Carolina Conference of Superior Court Judges ...

Top Stories from NCPW

  • News
  • Commentary

When the N.C. Senate elected Tom Fetzer to the UNC Board of Governors in March, it was widely seen a [...]

The 12 minutes spent on the phone with Duke Energy customer service shed no light on how — or if — c [...]

Crumbling ceilings. Failing air conditioning and heating systems. Broken down school buses. Mold inf [...]

This story has been updated with comments from Jim Womack, who did not respond earlier to questions. [...]

Last week, the General Assembly announced which legislators will serve on the Joint Legislative Task [...]

The latest effort in Washington to repeal and not actually replace the Affordable Care Act has a dif [...]

Conservative group “reviewing” bigoted attacks; funding from major NC corporations implicated Nearly [...]

5---number of days since Senators Bill Cassidy and Lindsey Graham unveiled a new proposal to repeal [...]

Featured | Special Projects

NC Budget 2017
The maze of the NC Budget is complex. Follow the stories to follow the money.
Read more


NC Redistricting 2017
New map, new districts, new lawmakers. Here’s what you need to know about gerrymandering in NC.
Read more