Attorneys for plaintiffs alleging that Louisiana’s termination of federal unemployment benefits under the American Recovery Plan was a violation of state and federal law have appealed a trial court’s denial of their request for an injunction.
The request to the First Circuit Court of Appeal in East Baton Rouge was filed Thursday in the wake of a trial court judge’s denial of the plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction against the state. On July 1, Louisiana terminated $300-per-week benefits for unemployed residents under the federal COVID-19 relief act.
Although Judge Timothy Kelley earlier this month found that he wasn’t convinced the five plaintiffs in the case would be successful in their lawsuit, he did conclude that they had suffered “immediate and irreparable harm” as a result of the cutoff of jobless benefits.
“My understanding was the reason he ruled against granting the injunction is more of a question of law as opposed to a question of fact,” Wendy Menard, one of the plaintiffs’ attorneys, told the Louisiana Record.
The writ filed this week argues that the Louisiana Employment Security Law requires the state to provide “all advantages available under the provisions of the Social Security Act that relate to unemployment compensation.”
The American Recovery Plan law was administered and implemented through Section 903 of the Social Security Act, so the termination of the federal benefits represents a violation of Gov. John Bel Edwards’ and the Louisiana Workforce Commission’s obligations under the state law, the complaint says.
In addition, the termination of benefits violates the plaintiffs’ equal-protection rights since they have been treated differently than other beneficiaries of the American Recovery Plan, such as those receiving rental assistance, this week’s filing states.
The lawsuit also describes how the state moved to cut the federal jobless benefits while requiring the state’s weekly unemployment benefit amounts to increase as of Jan. 1, 2022.
“Although increasing the maximum weekly benefit is undoubtedly a legitimate government purpose, it is irrational to enact such an increase by termination of an unrelated federal funding program,” the lawsuit states.
The plaintiffs are seeking an expedited review of the issues because the federal unemployment benefits under the American Recovery Plan are scheduled to run out on Sept. 6.
Manard described the testimony of the plaintiffs during the trial proceedings and their difficulties securing employment as COVID-19 cases spiked in the state as very moving.
“We are hopeful because we do believe that the law is on our side,” she said.