On September 2, 1986, Plaintiffs, three homeless families with dependent children, together with the National Coalition for the Homeless, filled a lawsuit in the U.S District Court for the District of Columbia, against the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HSS), in his ...
read more >
On September 2, 1986, Plaintiffs, three homeless families with dependent children, together with the National Coalition for the Homeless, filled a lawsuit in the U.S District Court for the District of Columbia, against the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HSS), in his official capacity, and the HSS. The Plaintiffs alleged that HSS had failed to properly monitor and enforce the compliance of States participating in the federal Emergency Assistance to Families program (EAF), established pursuant to Title IV-A of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. S 601 et seq. (the "Act"), and which was designed to provide prompt access to emergency shelter assistance for homeless families.
The complaint alleged that HHS had not performed the specific actions required by the Act and its implementing regulations to assess each state's compliance with its approved plans, and had failed to take any action adequate to ensure that states actually provided emergency shelter assistance to eligible homeless families. The claim was brought under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§706(1)-(2), which requires Federal agencies to comply with their administrative regulations and which forbid arbitrary and capricious enforcement. The Plaintiffs sought a declaration from the court that HHS was obligated to ensure States adhere to their commitments relating to the EAF program, and an injunction compelling HHS to ensure participating states provided sufficient funding to guarantee emergency shelter assistance.
On April 11, 1989, the District Court (Judge John Garrett Penn) granted HHS's Motion to Dismiss, finding that the Plaintiffs lacked standing to sue. Coker v. Bowen, 715 F.Supp. 383 (D. D.C. 1989). The Plaintiffs appealed the dismissal to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, which on May 4, 1990 (Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg), affirmed the lower court's decision. The Appellate Court found that the Administrative Procedure Act did not create a private cause of action under which a suit could be brought to demand judicial review of a federal agency's failure to enforce statutory provisions.
The case is closed.Alex Colbert-Taylor - 06/25/2013