Appeals Court Sides with Ohioans Whose Pandemic Unemployment Benefits were Cut Off; Ohio Must Seek $900 Million in Forwent Covid Aid, Court Says, and other C-Virus related stories

Appeals court sides with Ohioans whose pandemic unemployment benefits were cut off:

An appeals court ruled in favor of Ohioans seeking federal unemployment benefits that Gov. Mike DeWine cut off early during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The judges ruled that it's not impossible to reinstate the nearly $900 million in benefits, even if the DeWine administration thinks it's unlikely Ohioans will see that money.

The Tenth District Court of Appeals' June 30 ruling frees up a Franklin County judge to order Ohio to ask for the cut-off benefits.

“This decision is a victory for the rule of law and for the thousands of Ohioans who continue to struggle with the economic fallout of COVID-19," said attorney Marc Dann, who brought the case.

During the initial months of the COVID-19 pandemic, Congress approved an additional $300 per week for unemployed people. But DeWine, a Republican, stopped that program 10 weeks earlier than the September 2021 end date, forgoing about $900 million in benefits.

Unemployed Ohioans like Candy Bowling sued, saying DeWine didn't have the power to cut off benefits early. After years of legal wrangling, a local judge said Ohio should ask President Donald Trump's administration for the money to dole out to Ohioans. --->READ MORE HERE

Ohio Must Seek $900 Million in Forwent Covid Aid, Court Says:

Ohio’s governor must work to get an estimated $900 million from the federal government for expanded unemployment benefits the state forwent during the Covid-19 pandemic, a state appeals court ruled Monday.

When the Ohio Supreme Court in 2022 dismissed an appeal in the case of a denial of a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction—which it did in a one-sentence order that said “this cause is dismissed, sua sponte, as moot"—it didn’t mean the whole case should be tossed, the Ohio Court of Appeals, 10th District said. The state high court’s ruling came more than a year after the expanded unemployment program ended.

“If the Supreme Court had wanted to provide legal reasoning that necessarily implied the mootness of the entire case, or if it had wanted to issue a mandate for the trial court to dismiss the entire case on remand, it could have done so,” Judge M. Shawn Dingus (D) wrote for himself and Judges Laurel Beatty Blunt (D) and Carly M. Edelstein (D).

The decision is part of a string of litigation dating back to Gov. Mike DeWine’s (R) 2021 decision to withdraw from the program two months early. --->READ MORE HERE

Follow links below to relevant/related stories and resources:

Many children suffering ongoing COVID symptoms

COVID Variant NB.1.8.1 May Cause Razor Blade Throat, But It's Not as Severe as Past Variants

USA TODAY: Coronavirus Updates

WSJ: Coronavirus Live Updates

YAHOO NEWS: Coronavirus Live Updates

NEW YORK POST: Coronavirus The Latest

If you like what you see, please "Like" and/or Follow us on FACEBOOK here, GETTR here, and TWITTER here.