Judge to rule on jobless benefits

Decision expected today as federal aid is set to end

A Baltimore judge is expected to issue a ruling Saturday morning on two cases that aim to stop Maryland from cutting off federal unemployment benefits this weekend.

After hearing arguments in a virtual hearing Friday afternoon, Circuit Judge Lawrence Fletcher-Hill said he would deliver a written decision by 10 a.m.

The cases have come down to the 11th hour, with benefits scheduled to end in Maryland at 11:59 p.m. Saturday. They include $300 weekly payments for all claimants and programs aiding the self-employed and others who aren’t typically covered by unemployment insurance.

Two separate lawsuits were brought by unemployed Marylanders challenging Republican Gov. Larry Hogan’s decision to end federal pandemic benefits. Maryland Labor Secretary Tiffany Robinson is also named as a defendant in both lawsuits.

The plaintiffs want the judge to issue a temporary restraining order to stop Maryland from ending the programs.

“It’s difficult to overstate the severity of the harm,” if the benefits end prematurely, said attorney Meghan Casey, who is representing six of the plaintiffs.

The economy is improving but still needs to catch up, she said, and people are at risk of losing their homes and not being able to feed their families.

Hogan is one of about two dozen Republican governors who have moved to terminate the benefits earlier than September, when the federal government plans to end them. He announced last month he would end the programs, pointing to job growth and business complaints of “severe worker shortages.”

Casey said the next two months are critical. Some of the plaintiffs, including university service employees and hospitality workers, have been told by their employers that they will eventually be called back to work.

“None of the plaintiffs in this case is asking for a permanent handout, your honor,” she told the judge.

Attorneys for the unemployed said there is no evidence that ending the payments will help fill job positions or otherwise aid Maryland’s economy. Instead, they said, the state is turning down $1.9 billion in federal funds.

They contend that the governor and labor secretary have violated their obligations under state law and the Maryland Constitution.

A lawyer for Hogan and Robinson argued that Maryland law does not require the state to take every benefit offered by the federal government.

Hogan has sought to balance the needs of employees and employers, and made his decision in the context of job growth and indications from employers that they are having trouble filling openings, attorney Christopher Mellott said.

“Maryland has had good results in vaccines,” Mellott said. “It has undertaken efforts to get businesses open.”

Lawyers for the unemployed have pointed to a similar case in Indiana, where a judge recently ordered officials to continue to paying the federal benefits there.

But Mellott said that state has different laws than Maryland regarding accepting benefits.

“In Indiana, the statutes are completely different,”

Mellott said, pointing to language that says Indiana must secure “all the rights and benefits” under certain federal laws.

Most people receiving jobless aid in Maryland are receiving it solely through the federal pandemic programs, rather than state insurance — more than 85%, according to the latest figures available from the state labor department.

About 178,000 people were receiving benefits as of June 19, according to the state agency. Of those, about 153,000 people were on either Pandemic Unemployed Assistance — a program for the self-employed, gig workers and others not usually covered — or Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation, which provides extra weeks of aid to people who have exhausted regular benefits. The rest were on regular state unemployment insurance.

The private law firm Venable is representing the state officials. Typically, the Maryland attorney general’s office defends state agencies. Democratic Attorney General Brian Frosh has publicly opposed Hogan’s decision.

Fletcher-Hill initially planned to issue a ruling

Friday, but said after hearing arguments that he needed more time.

“I simply need a little bit of additional time to look at and think about some things before ruling on this important matter,” he said.

The proceedings were held via Zoom and garnered a large virtual audience. Throughout the hearing, the judge had to remind people to mute themselves. About 250 people had joined at the beginning and more continually joined — a far larger crowd, Fletcher-Hill noted, than could fit into a courtroom “in nonpandemic times.”