LEJ seeks to  ensure access to critical medical services for residents under the compact of free association


Hawaii has faced pressure to reduce the state’s expenses since 2009. In response, the Department of Human Services cut critical health services for new immigrant residents of Hawai`i, and residents present under the Compact of Free Association (COFA). Both immigrant groups represent some of the most marginalized people in our society. LEJ has been involved in ongoing advocacy surrounding these cuts, seeking to restore medical benefits for some of Hawai`i’s most needy low income individuals.

History:

In September of 2009, DHS eliminated the Hawaii Immigrant Health Initiative, a state program providing critical medical coverage for legal immigrants present in the United States for fewer than five years. At the same time DHS also eliminated all residents present in Hawaii under the Compact of Free Association from QUEST, the state’s Medicaid coverage plan that assists the low income population in Hawaii with their health care needs. All of these recipients were transferred to a new program known as Basic Health Hawai`i (BHH) which severely restricted health coverage. LEJ with pro bono partners brought the case of Sounds v. Koller in federal court to stop the health care cuts. On September 1, 2009 Federal Judge Michael Seabright issues a TRO enjoining from the state from proceeding with the transfer of COFA migrants and recent legal immigrants from QUEST to the BHH program.

In January, 2010, the state held public hearings over possible regulations to recreate the BHH program for COFA migrants and new legal immigrants. In May 2010, DHS again announced the implemented Basic Health Hawaii, a new separate medical program for both groups that provides very limited medical coverage. They also announced a cap on the BHH program that would permit an enrollment of only 7,000 individuals. For years, Hawaii DHS has provided access to critical medical services to these groups. Hawaii receives almost $30 million annually from the Federal Government in COFA impact funds to offset any state expenditures related to serving COFA residents. Now, COFA residents and immigrants are left with limited medical coverage that does not provide for their basic health needs, or are unable to enroll in any program because of capped enrollment.

Legal Challenges


Korab v. Koller

LEJ believes the decision to selectively single out certain minority groups for disparate access to critical medical services is unconstitutional, as it discriminates based on national origin and alienage in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Additionally, Basic Health Hawaii forces individuals with disabilities to seek institutionalized treatment, a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.  LEJ has filed a class action lawsuit against the Department of Human Services, seeking immediate injunctive relief and restoration of these critical services.


sitting.jpg
(Photo from Star-Bulletin, Craig T. Kojima)

Sound v. Koller

LEJ and pro bono partners, Alston Hunt Floyd & Ing, successfully represented COFA residents in bringing a federal class action law suit in September 2009. The case, Sound v. Koller, argued that the implementation of the Basic Health Hawaii program violated the COFA residents’ due process rights by failing to provide adequate notice to residents and their equal protection rights by basing the state’s action on the alienage of COFA residents. DHS sent letters notifying residents about the reduction in health care provided by the BHH program only 2 weeks before the scheduled implementation date and failed to divulge that the new program would not cover any treatment for dialysis or chemotherapy. While many compact residents speak limited or no English, the notices were printed only in English and, although there was a phone number for those requesting clarifications on coverage or more information on the program, the number was answered by a menu driven recording that only used English to assist callers. The letter did not adequately explain the actions taken by DHS, the right to a fair hearing to contest the transfer to BHH or the options available to COFA residents. Federal District Court Judge Michael Seabright determined that the COFA plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits of their due process claim and issued a Temporary Restraining Order restraining the DHS from implementation of the BHH program.

Another case was filed simultaneously in state Circuit Court claiming that the state had violated the HRS Chapter 91 (Hawaii Administrative Procedures Act) by altering the health care program without giving the public adequate notice and an opportunity to comment. The state conceded that it had not properly complied with Chapter 91 and held the required public hearings in January, 2010 and announced the new implementation of the BHH program in May, 2010. On July 1st the state began the implementation of the Basic Health Hawaii program (BHH). The most recent litigation on the constitutionality of the BHH program is the current Korab v. Koller case challenging the severe cuts in health care provided by this program as a violation of equal protection.

korab v. koller

Complaint, filed 8/23/10.
   Amended Complaint, filed 3/23/11
   Answer, filed 4/11/2011

State's Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim, filed 9/9/10.
    LEJ's Opposition, 10/5/10.
    State's Reply, 10/5/10
    Order Denying Motion to Dismiss, 11/10/10.

Motion for Preliminary Injunction, filed 9/13/10.
    State's Opposition, 10/4/10
    LEJ's Reply, 10/12/10
    Order Granting Preliminary Injunction, 12/13/10
    State's Notice of Appeal, 1/10/11

Stipulation and Order granting class certification, filed 11/24/10.

State's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment re: New Residents, filed 4/28/11
    LEJ's Opposition, 5/9/11
    State's Reply, 5/16/11
    Order Denying Motion, 7/28/11

LEJ's Motion for Preliminary Injunction re: New Residents, filed 4/28/11
    State's Opposition, 5/9/11
    LEJ's Reply, 5/16/11
    Order Denying Motion, 7/28/11


sound v. koller

State Complaint, filed 8/31/09

State Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction, filed 8/31/09
Federal Complaint, filed 8/31/09

Federal Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction, filed 8/31/09

Federal Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Plaintiff's Motion for a TRO, filed 9/1/09.