42 U.S.C. § 1320b
Repealed. Pub. L. 93–647, § 3(e)(1), Jan. 4, 1975, 88 Stat. 2349
[repealed]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15
cases (8 in the last 5 years), 2005–2026 · leading case: Aelen Unan v. Nick Lyon
Aelen Unan v. Nick Lyon (2017)
“3359 (codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. §1320b‒7(d)(4)(A)). Non-citizen applicants are required to present verified documentation to prove their immigration status.”
Chamber of Commerce of United States of America v. Whiting (2011)
“See IRCA §121(a)(1)(C), 42 U. S. C. §1320b– 7(d)(3). The existence of a verification system in one provision of IRCA, coupled with its absence in the provi sion governing employment of unauthorized aliens, sug gests strongly that Congress did not contemplate any role for the…”
United Seniors Association, Incorporated v. Social Security Administration, National Taxpayers Union, Amicus Supporting (2005)
“” 42 U.S.C.A. § 1320b — 10(a)(1). USA argues that envelopes are not included in § 1140(a)(1) because, under the “rule of the last antecedent,” the words “other communication” merely modify “advertisement, solicitation, circular, book, and pamphlet” by covering the contents of…”
Commonwealth v. Peoples Benefit Services, Inc. (2006)
“42 U.S.C. § 1320b — 10(a)(1). PBS notes that the phrase alleged to have been misused in PBS solicitations, ("Senior Security Supplement”), is not on the prohibited list; and, because it includes the word "senior”, which is not on the list of proscribed words, the phrase is not a…”
Trump v. CASA, Inc. (2025)
“§2025 (e); 42 U. S. C. §1320b–7(a)(1). States could not comply with those laws under the Government’s alternative injunctions because children covered by the Citizenship Order in non- party States would still be treated as noncitizens at birth.”
Advocate Christ Medical Center v. Xavier Becerra (2023)
“42 U.S.C. § 1320b–17. The hospitals assert that SSA assigns to individuals whose benefits are so withheld the E01 code, which indicates a loss of SSI eligibility, even though these individuals receive an SSI benefit that cancels another monetary liability.”
Donor Network West v. Kennedy (2025)
“1-1 at 4); 42 U.S.C. § 1320b- 25 8(a)(2)(A)(ii). CMS found that racial minorities had comparable donation and 26 service rates at both DNWest and NDN, and the increased organ donation 27 expected from the waiver would assure equitable treatment for all those in need 28 of a…”
League of Women Voters v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (2026)
“at 3391 (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 1320b–7 note). But this provision, alongside its cross-references, has little relevance to this case.”
Trump v. CASA, Inc. Revisions: 7/02/25 (2025)
“§2025 (e); 42 U. S. C. §1320b–7(a)(1). States could not comply with those laws under the Government’s alternative injunctions because children covered by the Citizenship Order in non- party States would still be treated as noncitizens at birth.”
O'Connor v. Fresno-Community Hospital etc. CA5 (2022)
“(42 U.S.C. § 1320b- 8(a)(1).) The protocol must (1) assure that family members are made aware of both the donation option and their option to decline; (2) encourage “discretion and sensitivity with respect to the circumstances, views, and beliefs” of such families; and (3)…”
Trump v. CASA, Inc. Revisions: 6/27/25 (2025)
“§2025 (e); 42 U. S. C. §1320b–7(a)(1). States could not comply with those laws under the Government’s alternative injunctions because children covered by the Citizenship Order in non- party States would still be treated as noncitizens at birth.”
Trump v. CASA, Inc. Revisions: 6/27/25 (2025)
“§2025 (e); 42 U. S. C. §1320b–7(a)(1). States could not comply with those laws under the Government’s alternative injunctions because children covered by the Citizenship Order in non- party States would still be treated as noncitizens at birth.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.