Supreme Court of the United States
Shalala v. Illinois Council on Long Term Care, in — Stevens, J…
March 6, 2000529 U.S. 1
Summary
Justice Stevens dissents and joins Justice Thomas. He argues the Social Security Act and Medicare Act distinction in § 405(h) means providers challenging reimbursement regulations are not barred by the statute's 'to recover' language. He would allow providers to sue under general federal-question jurisdiction. Justice Thomas, dissenting, would resolve the statutory ambiguity in favor of preenforcement judicial review and disagrees with the majority's treatment of Ringer and Michigan Academy. Justice Scalia, dissenting, joins Thomas's reasoning on Michigan Academy but separately argues preenforcement review is a background rule rather than a presumption.