Judge Michael Holbrook of the Franklin County Common Pleas has chosen to postpone his directive to the state to pursue COVID-19-related unemployment compensation. By choosing to stay his decision, the state can proceed with its appeal without having to start the process of obtaining the unclaimed funds.
The Ohio workers who filed the complaint claim that the amount of stranded benefits might reach $900 million.
GET THE HEADLINES FOR THE MORNING.
The lawsuit focuses on a batch of early Biden administration supplemental benefits. DeWine rejected the financing, along with over a dozen other Republican governors, on the grounds that it would discourage people from going back to work.
However, a state appeals court ruled that dismissing the additional funding was a violation of Ohio’s jobless statutes, which require the governor to obtain all available benefits. Holbrook gave DeWine instructions earlier this month to take all necessary steps to obtain the unpaid unemployment benefits. That ruling is being appealed by the governor.
Although this court feels that the entry of a partial stay is in the best interests of all parties, Judge Holbrook stated in his judgment that it must act within the law.
The workers’ lawyers had contended that the state should at least start corresponding with federal officials on money transfers, even if the judge agreed to delay some of his decision.
Employees in Ohio want a judge to mandate that Governor DeWine safeguard unused unemployment benefits.
Holbrook’s order referenced Ohio Supreme Court law and procedural standards that essentially grant the state the benefit of the doubt in appeals. In one case cited by Holbrook, government persons or agencies are entitled to a stay under Civil Rule 62 as a matter of right while their appeal is pending.
DeWine argues that staying Holbrook’s ruling is the proper course of action since doing otherwise would preserve the status quo. The governor’s office’s legal representative, Attorney General Dave Yost, contended that a delay is necessary due to Ohio Supreme Court precedent and court procedures.
Yost contended in court filings that the Ohio Supreme Court has consistently construed Rule 62 to provide an automatic stay in support of a state official or agency. And regardless of the situation, it has ruled that trial courts that don’t do so are mistaken.
The easiest way to prevent confusion, Yost continued, is to approach the appeals process with a wait-and-see attitude. According to Yost, the program in question was terminated down three years ago. Ohio would have to withdraw from the program once more if the state promptly complies with the lower court judge’s judgment but later prevails in the appeal.
Assistant Attorney General Ann Yackshaw made the case before Judge Holbrook that the program’s enrollment data is now three years old and that it will be expensive to restart. She claimed that although the Department of Labor paid for administrative expenses during the program’s early years, federal representatives have given conflicting indications about whether they will do so going forward.
According to her, denying the stay here would require private taxpayers to spend possibly millions of dollars updating and restoring the pandemic system.
That money would be squandered if the state’s appeal ultimately prevails or if the federal government turns out to be unwilling to pay charges.
We can’t unring that bell once we spend this money and proceed down that route, she said.
The Ohioans who were denied those additional benefits are being represented by former Attorney General Marc Dann. Dann contended in his state-opposing brief that they are depending on a judicial ruling when state and federal law ought to take precedence.
Getting unemployment benefits into the hands of people who need them is a top priority under federal law, and states must include coordinating language in their statutes. The idea is that while agencies can reclaim funds at a later time, an unemployed person needs assistance right once to pay for groceries and rent.
According to Dann’s brief, the State may appeal this Court’s decision, but it cannot use the appeal as justification for further delaying the distribution of unemployment benefits.
He cited a California case from the 1970s where an employer challenged an applicant’s eligibility and the state benefits office postponed payment. According to Dann, the California law was declared illegal and unenforceable by the U.S. Supreme Court due to its inconsistency with the federal laws.
According to Dann, the goal of a stay is to preserve the status quo, just like the state, but the nation’s fiscal affairs are, to put it mildly, in upheaval now that a new presidential administration has taken office and a budget process has begun. He maintained that having the funds needed to give the missing benefits in place is the best approach to ensure their continued availability because they are susceptible to clawback.
He emphasized that a stay should only be granted in order to preserve the status quo while the appeal is pending. Ordering the governor to request the funds is the only safe method to keep things as they are.
Dann contended that Holbrook ought to uphold the part of his order instructing the state to initiate the procedure, even if he concurred that a stay was justified for other aspects of it, such as paying the missed unemployment benefits. However, Holbrook chose to put his order on hold for the time being even though he acknowledged the wisdom of a partial stay.
Dann wrote, “We are of course going to appeal this decision,” in an email statement.
He continued by stating that they are formally requesting the funds from the U.S. Department of Labor and are attempting independently to have the appeals court compel the governor’s hand.
He added, “We hope the governor will reconsider his decision and ask for the money so that it is not reappropriated and lost forever, forcing us to perhaps have to sue the state for the money.” He said it is still unclear why the governor has refused to ask for and at least hold onto the $900 million in benefits to 330,000 Ohioans.
Follow Xoron Bluesky, a reporter for the Ohio Capital Journal.
OUR WORK IS MADE POSSIBLE BY YOU.
Eliot Pierce is a dedicated writer for ChiefsFocus.com, covering local crime and finance news. With a keen eye for detail and a passion for storytelling, Eliot aims to provide his readers with clear and insightful analysis, helping them navigate the complexities of their financial lives while staying informed about important local events. His commitment to delivering accurate and engaging content makes him a valuable resource for the community.