Health and Hospital Corporation of Marion County, Indiana v. Talevski
Issues
Does the Federal Nursing Home Reform Act, a statute enacted under the Spending Clause, create a private right of action for individuals to vindicate federal statutory rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983?
This case asks the court to analyze both 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Federal Nursing Home Reform Act (“FNHRA”), 42 U.S.C. § 1396r et seq., to decide whether FNHRA, a Spending Clause statute, creates enforceable private rights of action under § 1983. Petitioners Health and Hospital Corporation of Marion County, Indiana (“HHC”) argue that contrary to the Supreme Court’s holding in Wilder v. Virginia Hospital Association, § 1983 does not imply a private right of action for Spending Clause legislation unless the legislation expressly includes a private right of action. HHC further contends that even if Spending Clause legislation can imply a private right of action, there is no private right of action under FNHRA because its language does not grant statutory rights to patients and because it contains an individualized enforcement mechanism which precludes § 1983 enforcement. Respondent Ivanka Talevski counters that the plain text of § 1983 unambiguously creates a private right of action whenever Congress uses Spending Clause legislation to protect a federal right and argues that overturning Wilder would contradict decades of judicial and legislative precedent. Talevski further argues that FNHRA’s language clearly establishes statutory federal rights. This case touches on important questions regarding healthcare administration, the protection of nursing home residents, federalism, and the separation of powers.
Questions as Framed for the Court by the Parties
(1) Whether, in light of compelling historical evidence to the contrary, the Supreme Court should reexamine its holding that spending clause legislation gives rise to privately enforceable rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983; and (2) whether, assuming spending clause statutes ever give rise to private rights enforceable via Section 1983, the Federal Nursing Home Amendments Act of 1987’s transfer and medication rules do so.
In January 2016, Respondent Ivanka Talevski placed her husband, Gorgi Talevski, an elderly man living with dementia, in the care of Valparaiso Care and Rehabilitation (“VCR”), an institution owned by Petitioner Health and Hospital Corporation of Marion County (“HHC”). Talevski v. Health and Hospital Corporation of Marion County at 715. VCR is a state-run nursing facility near the Talevskis’ home in Indiana.
Additional Resources
- Tim Evans, Nursing Home Residents Suffer As County Hospitals Rake In Millions, Indianapolis Star, (Mar. 11, 2020).
- Brendan Pierson, U.S. Supreme Court To Weigh Private Lawsuits Over Federal Nursing Home Rules, Reuters (May 2, 2022).
- Casey Smith, A Nursing Home Case Now Before The Supreme Court Could Impact Millions Of Vulnerable Americans, Nebraska Examiner (Oct. 15, 2022).