42 U.S.C. § 1396c
Operation of State plans
For information regarding the constitutionality of section 121(a) of Pub. L. 89–97, enacting this section, see the Table of Laws Held Unconstitutional in Whole or in Part by the Supreme Court on the Constitution Annotated website, constitution.congress.gov.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 199
cases (23 in the last 5 years), 1969–2026 · leading case: National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius
National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (2012)
“The threatened loss of over 10 percent of a State’s overall budget is economic dragooning that leaves the States with no real option but to acquiesce in the Medicaid expansion. The Government claims that the expansion is properly viewed as only a modification of the existing…”
Planned Parenthood of AR, etc. v. Cindy Gillespie (2017)
“Under that authority, the Secretary has required States to give providers the right to appeal an exclusion from the Medicaid program.”
Wilder v. Virginia Hospital Assn. (1990)
“42 U. S. C. § 1396c (1982 ed.). The Secretary has expressed his intention to withhold funds if the state plan does not comply with the statute or if there is "noncompliance in practice.”
Planned Parenthood of Grt TX v. Courtney Ph (2020)
“91 42 U.S.C. § 1396c. 21 Case: 17-50282 Document: 00515648975 Page: 22 Date Filed: 11/23/2020 No.”
State of Tenn. v. United States Dep't of State (2019)
“42 U.S.C. § 1396c. The Medicaid Act provides for a system of administrative and judicial review for HHS's decisions concerning state plans and a determination to reduce or withhold a state's FMAP.”
Armstrong v. Exceptional Child Center, Inc. (2015)
“42 U.S.C. § 1396c. As we have elsewhere explained, the "express provision of one method of enforcing a substantive rule suggests that Congress intended to preclude others.”
Suter v. Artist M. (1992)
“, at 512 (citing 42 U. S. C. § 1396c). [2] In substantially identical language, the Adoption Act, too, requires States to live up to the commitments stated in their plans.”
Doe v. Kidd (2007)
“§ 1396a, sets forth several criteria that a "State plan for medical assistance" must satisfy in order to gain federal approval and enable the Secretary to disburse federal funds.”
Sabree Ex Rel. Sabree v. Richman (2004)
“42 U.S.C. § 1396c. individuals . . . . There is no dispute that plaintiffs 42 U.”
Florida Ex Rel. Attorney General v. United States Department of Health & Human Services (2011)
“Under 42 U.S.C. § 1396c, a state whose plan does not comply with the requirements under § 1396a will be notified by HHS of its noncompliance, and "further payments will not be made to the State (or, in [HHS's] discretion.”
Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America v. Walsh, Acting Commissioner, Maine Department of Human Services (2003)
“1, 17 (1981), is set forth in the Act itself: termination of funding by the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, see 42 U. S. C. § 1396c. Petitioner must seek enforcement of the Medicaid conditions by that authority — and may seek and obtain relief in the…”
Safe Streets Alliance v. Hickenlooper (2017)
“See 42 U.S.C. § 1396c. Providers seeking more generous payments could try to persuade the Secretary to exercise that authority, but the Secretary’s decision not to take such a step could be successfully challenged in court under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) “only when…”
— 42 U.S.C. § 1396c(2) — 6 cases
Planned Parenthood of AR, etc. v. Cindy Gillespie (2017)
“Under that authority, the Secretary has required States to give providers the right to appeal an exclusion from the Medicaid program.”
Planned Parenthood of Grt TX v. Courtney Ph (2020)
“91 42 U.S.C. § 1396c. 21 Case: 17-50282 Document: 00515648975 Page: 22 Date Filed: 11/23/2020 No.”
North Carolina v. Heckler (1984)
— 42 U.S.C. § 1396c(A)(2) — 1 case
Ramey v. Rizzuto (1999)
— 42 U.S.C. § 1396c(l) — 2 cases
Minnesota v. Heckler (1983)
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.