Shield Denied for AHCA Chief in Trans Medicaid Coverage Case
Plaintiffs want to depose Agency for Health Care Administration Secretary Jason Weida, arguing that he has unique information about a rule that banned Medicaid reimbursements to health care providers for treatments such as puberty blockers, hormone therapy and surgeries for transgender people.
April 24, 2023 at 11:03 AM
4 minute read
A federal appeals court rejected a request to shield the secretary of the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration from testifying in a lawsuit challenging the state's prohibition on Medicaid coverage of gender-affirming care for transgender people.
Plaintiffs in the lawsuit want to depose AHCA Secretary Jason Weida, arguing that he has unique information about a rule approved last year that banned Medicaid reimbursements to health care providers for treatments such as puberty blockers, hormone therapy and surgeries for transgender people.
Lawyers for the state argued that, under what is known as the "apex doctrine," Weida should not have to testify because he is a high-ranking official.
But U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle this month denied the state's request for a protective order to block the deposition. Siding with plaintiffs, Hinkle found that Weida likely has "relevant, indeed significant, information not available from other sources."
Before his appointment as secretary this year, Weida was the agency's assistant deputy secretary for Medicaid policy and Medicaid quality at a time when it developed the rule blocking payments to health care providers for the targeted treatments.
The state, following Hinkle's ruling, sought what is known as a writ of mandamus from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit to try to shield Weida from testifying.
But a two-judge panel of the Atlanta-based appellate court on Friday ruled the state "does not have a clear and indisputable right" to a writ of mandamus.
"The district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that Weida is subject to deposition because he possesses unique or superior knowledge of discoverable information regarding the process that resulted in the agency adopting a rule that excludes the treatments," Judges Andrew Brasher and Britt C. Grant, who were both appointed by former President Donald Trump, wrote in Friday's ruling.
The agency adopted the Medicaid rule last summer, basing its decision, at least in part, on a report concluding that the targeted treatments are "not consistent with generally accepted professional medical standards and are experimental and investigational."
A group of plaintiffs filed a federal lawsuit in September challenging the rule, arguing that the gender-affirming treatments are "medically necessary" and "evidence-based."
The plaintiffs' legal team and the agency's lawyers have wrangled over the release of documents and other information related to the rule.
While some records have been protected from public scrutiny, others show that Weida was an architect of the report and was instrumental in the creation of the rule.
The records show that "Weida personally selected the consultants used" in the process to justify the rule, "managed the drafting of the consultants' reports to be used" in the process, and "ultimately oversaw the issuance" of the prohibition, lawyers for the plaintiffs wrote Monday in a response to the state's request for a writ of mandamus.
"And because Weida conducted much of these undertakings only orally, he is the only witness who can testify about them comprehensively," they argued.
The state for years had authorized Medicaid reimbursements for gender-affirming care before adopting the rule prohibiting such payments.
The lawsuit alleges that the state's prohibition on Medicaid coverage for gender dysphoria is unconstitutional and violates federal laws prohibiting discrimination based on sex. Costs of surgeries, services and medications can run to thousands of dollars per month.
The plaintiffs, who include adults, children and the children's parents, are being represented by groups such as Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund Inc., Southern Legal Counsel Inc., the Florida Health Justice Project, the National Health Law Program and the law firm Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman.
DeSantis' administration has authorized more than $1.3 million for legal and expert-witness fees in the dispute, according to a review of state records by The News Service of Florida.
The Medicaid prohibition is among a number of actions DeSantis, widely seen as a top contender for the Republican presidential nomination in 2024, has taken targeting transgender people.
At the request of the governor's administration, state medical boards banned doctors from using puberty blockers, hormone therapy and surgeries to treat minors for gender dysphoria. The federal government defines gender dysphoria clinically as "significant distress that a person may feel when sex or gender assigned at birth is not the same as their identity."
The Florida Legislature is considering a series of controversial measures related to transgender people, including a bill that the House approved last week to enshrine into law the medical boards' rules about gender-affirming care for children.
Dara Kam reports for the News Service of Florida.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDivided State Court Reinstates Dispute Over Replacement Vehicles Fees
5 minute readSecond Circuit Ruling Expands VPPA Scope: What Organizations Need to Know
6 minute read'They Got All Bent Out of Shape:' Parkland Lawyers Clash With Each Other
Courts of Appeal Conflicted Over Rule 1.442(c)(3) When Claims for Damages Involve a Husband and Wife
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250