High court to review immigration dispute
National News
The Supreme Court on Monday waded into a complicated dispute over a law aimed at keeping immigrant families together in a case that underscores the occasionally tense relationship between immigration proponents and the Obama administration as Congress debates immigration reform.
The justices said Monday they will hear an appeal from the Obama administration arguing that children who have become adults during their parents' years-long wait to become legal permanent residents of the United States should go to the back of the line in their own wait for visas. Under U.S. immigration law, children 21 and older cannot immigrate under their parents' applications for green cards, even if the parents' application took decades to process.
An immigration spokesman declined to comment on the case Monday. The Obama administration has argued in the past that the thousands of green card applicants who lost their place in line for U.S. residency when they turned 21 do not merit priority status when they file their own visa applications.
Immigration advocates said it is hypocritical of the Obama administration to tell Congress that the nation's immigration laws are too tough and need to be rewritten, while at the same time insisting on conservative interpretations of those laws when processing family visa applications. President Barack Obama has vowed to help immigrants obtain legal status while also deporting record numbers of immigrants.
Related listings
-
Court says human genes cannot be patented
National News 06/13/2013The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that companies cannot patent parts of naturally-occurring human genes, a decision with the potential to profoundly affect the emerging and lucrative medical and biotechnology industries. The high court's unanimous jud...
-
Court OKs Class-action Suit Over Apartment Leases
National News 06/05/2013An appeals court has certified a class-action lawsuit that seeks to invalidate provisions that are routinely included in apartment leases signed by University of Iowa students. The Iowa Court of Appeals ruled Thursday that tenants of landlord Tracy B...
-
Court Upholds Rifle Sales Reporting Requirement
National News 06/01/2013A federal appeals court panel has unanimously upheld an Obama administration requirement that dealers in southwestern border states report when customers buy multiple high-powered rifles. The firearms industry trade group, the National Shooting Sport...
Workers’ Compensation Subrogation of Administrative Fees and Costs
When a worker covered by workers’ compensation makes a claim against a third party, the workers’ compensation insurance retains the right to subrogate against any recovery from that third party for all benefits paid to or on behalf of a claimant injured at work. When subrogating for more than basic medical and indemnity benefits, the Texas workers’ compensation subrogation statute provides that “the net amount recovered by a claimant in a third‑party action shall be used to reimburse the carrier for benefits, including medical benefits that have been paid for the compensable injury.” TX Labor Code § 417.002.
In fact, all 50 states provide for similar subrogation. However, none of them precisely outlines which payments or costs paid by a compensation carrier constitute “compensation” and can be recovered. The result is industry-wide confusion and an ongoing debate and argument with claimants’ attorneys over what can and can’t be included in a carrier’s lien for recovery purposes.
In addition to medical expenses, death benefits, funeral costs and/or indemnity benefits for lost wages and loss of earning capacity resulting from a compensable injury, workers’ compensation insurance carriers also expend considerable dollars for case management costs, medical bill audit fees, rehabilitation benefits, nurse case worker fees, and other similar fees. They also incur other expenses in conjunction with the handling and adjusting of workers’ compensation claims. Workers’ compensation carriers typically assert, of course, that, they are entitled to reimbursement for such expenditures when it recovers its workers’ compensation lien. Injured workers and their attorneys disagree.