Feds direct states to check immigration status of their Medicaid enrollees
This week, the Trump administration's Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) announced an effort to check the immigration status of people who get their health insurance through Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program.
Medicaid is the public health insurance program for people with low incomes that's jointly funded by states and the federal government. For families that earn too much to qualify for Medicaid but not enough to afford private insurance, CHIP is a public program that provides low-cost health coverage for their children.
The feds will begin sending states monthly enrollment reports that identify people with Medicaid or CHIP whose immigration or citizenship status can't be confirmed through federal databases. States are then responsible for verifying the citizenship or immigration status of individuals in those reports. States are expected to take 'appropriate actions when necessary, including adjusting coverage or enforcing non-citizen eligibility rules,' according to a CMS press release.
'We are tightening oversight of enrollment to safeguard taxpayer dollars and guarantee that these vital programs serve only those who are truly eligible under the law,' Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who oversees CMS as secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, said in a press release announcing the new program.
As of April, roughly 71 million adults and children nationwide have Medicaid coverage, while another 7 million children have insurance through CHIP. Immigrants under age 65 are less likely to be covered by Medicaid than U.S.-born citizens, according to an analysis from health research organization KFF.
Immigrants who are in the country illegally aren't eligible for federally funded Medicaid and CHIP. Only citizens and certain lawfully present immigrants — green card holders and refugees, for example — can qualify.
But some states have chosen to expand Medicaid coverage for immigrants with their own funds. Twenty-three states offer pregnancy-related care regardless of citizenship or immigration status, according to KFF. Fourteen states provide coverage for children in low-income families regardless of immigration status, while seven states offer coverage to some adults regardless of status.
The tax and spending package President Donald Trump last month cuts federal spending on Medicaid by more than $1 trillion, leaving states to either make up the difference with their own funds or reduce coverage. But the new law also includes restrictions on coverage for certain immigrants, including stripping eligibility from refugees and asylum-seekers.
Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org.
Solve the daily Crossword
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
22 minutes ago
- New York Post
HHS nixes California sex ed grant after refusal to drop ‘radical' gender lessons
An office within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) terminated a federal grant funding California's sex education program aimed at preventing teen pregnancy and the spread of sexually transmitted diseases after the West Coast state reportedly refused to remove 'radical gender ideology' from its curriculum, Fox News Digital exclusively learned Thursday. 'California's refusal to comply with federal law and remove egregious gender ideology from federally funded sex-ed materials is unacceptable,' Andrew Gradison, acting assistant secretary at the Administration for Children and Families, said in comment provided to Fox News Digital Thursday. 'The Trump Administration will not allow taxpayer dollars to be used to indoctrinate children. Accountability is coming for every state that uses federal funds to teach children delusional gender ideology.' Advertisement The Administration for Children and Families, an office under HHS' umbrella that funds state, local and tribal organizations to provide support for families such as child care, announced Thursday morning that it was terminating the funding to California's Personal Responsibility Education Program (PREP) grant. The PREP program aims to educate California's youth, ages 10–19, on preventing teen pregnancy and the spread of sexually transmitted infections, which the state says has led to students in the program 'delaying sexual activity, increasing condom or contraceptive use for sexually active youth, or reducing number of sexual partners.' 4 An office within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) terminated a federal grant funding California's sex education program aimed at preventing teen pregnancy and the spread of sexually transmitted diseases after the West Coast state reportedly refused to remove 'radical gender ideology' from its curriculum. REUTERS 'Program services are engaging, nonjudgmental, medically accurate and tailored to the unique needs of youth participants and their communities,' the PREP website states. 'Services are offered in a range of settings, including schools, juvenile justice facilities, homeless shelters and foster care group homes. CA PREP activities also include community engagement and promotion of clinical linkages to youth-friendly reproductive health services.' Advertisement PREP specifically aims to assist those who 'reside, attend school or receive reproductive health services in a high-need geographic area; are homeless and/or runaway; attend an alternative or continuation school; are in or emancipated from foster care; are in the juvenile justice or probation system; identify as LGBTQ; are receiving treatment for mental health or substance abuse issues; have special needs; live in migrant farmworker families or are expectant/parenting female youth up to age 21.' The PREP grant has been under scrutiny by the Trump administration since at least March, when the Administration for Children and Families requested program leaders send copies of its curriculum and other relevant course materials to them for review. The probe was initially launched to ensure the state's sexual education programming is medically accurate and age-appropriate. 4 The Administration for Children and Families, an office under HHS' umbrella that funds state, local and tribal organizations to provide support for families such as child care, announced Thursday morning that it was terminating the funding to California's Personal Responsibility Education Program (PREP) grant. AFP via Getty Images Previous grant funding shows California's PREP program received just under $6 million from the federal government in fiscal year 2022. All in, California could lose $12.3 million in funding that it has not yet received, covering multiple years, according to HHS. Advertisement The Administration for Children and Families reviewed the program's curriculum and other teaching materials, and found a lengthy list of subjects and language deemed to fall outside the program's 'authorizing statute,' in particular references to 'gender ideology.' In June, Fox News Digital reported Administration for Children and Families gave the sex education program a 60-day deadline to remove all references to gender identity or face potential termination of its funding. The 60-day deadline just ran dry, with the Administration for Children and Families subsequently terminating the funding and sending a letter to Sydney Armendariz, the division chief of Maternal Child, and Adolescent Health Division at the California Department of Public Health (CDPH), and Matthew Green, the deputy director of the Center for Family Health at CDPH, declaring it was 'terminating all California State Personal Responsibility Education Program (PREP) awards and suspending the funding effective August 21, 2025.' The letter sent Thursday reported that following the Administration for Children and Families' June request to remove what it said was radical gender ideology from PREP teachings, California refused in a letter of its own. 4 The PREP grant has been under scrutiny by the Trump administration since at least March, when the Administration for Children and Families requested program leaders send copies of its curriculum and other relevant course materials to them for review. AFP via Getty Images Advertisement 'CDPH will not make any such modifications at this time for several reasons,' the California Department of Public Health said in a letter to ACF earlier this week, according to HHS. 'The listed reasons were: 1) PREP materials had already been reviewed and approved by ACF; 2) the materials are medically accurate; 3) the gender ideology content is relevant to purposes identified in the authorizing statute, specifically the adult preparation subjects listed at 42 U.S.C. § 713(b)(2)(C); and 4) ACF does not have authority to take an enforcement action.' Among the materials Administration for Children and Families found amid its review of the curriculum was a lesson for middle school-aged students that sought to introduce them to the concepts of transgenderism, Fox News Digital previously reported. 'We've been talking during class about messages people get on how they should act as boys and girls—but as many of you know, there are also people who don't identify as boys or girls, but rather as transgender or gender queer,' the lesson states to students. 'This means that even if they were called a boy or a girl at birth and may have body parts that are typically associated with being a boy or a girl, on the inside, they feel differently.' Other flagged lessons in the materials included curriculum for high school-aged students with instructions on what it means to be 'nonbinary' and language that informed students 'gender-identity' is 'essentially a social status.' 4 California could lose $12.3 million in funding that it has not yet received, covering multiple years, according to HHS. Christopher Sadowski 'In a disturbing and egregious abuse of federal funds, California has been using taxpayer money to teach curricula that could encourage kids to contemplate mutilating their genitals, 'altering their body… through hormone therapy,' 'adding or removing breast tissue,' and 'changing their name.' It instructed teachers to 'remind students that some men are born with female anatomy,'' HHS said in a Thursday press release of the teachings. The Administration for Children and Families also had raised concerns over materials for teachers within the program, including lessons on avoiding misgendering individuals. Advertisement 'All people have a gender identity,' the teacher training materials stated, Fox Digital previously reported. It also instructed educators to refer to people who identify with their sex 'assigned at birth' as 'cisgender,' and added that those who are not 'cisgender' may identify as 'non-binary, agender, bigender, genderfluid, (or) genderqueer.' Gradison's letter to the California health leaders Thursday underscored that Administration for Children and Families' decision to terminate the grant is final unless California health leaders file an appeal. 'This is the final decision of the Administration for Children and Families,' the letter reads. 'It shall be the final decision of the Department unless, within 30 days after receiving this decision, you submit a notice of appeal to the Departmental Appeals Board (DAB).'
Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
Supreme Court lets Trump admin cut off health grants it says advance DEI or ‘gender ideology extremism'
Chief Justice John Roberts joined the court's liberals in dissent from the court's decision to permit the funding halt. The Supreme Court is allowing the Trump administration to cut off health research grants it contends advance diversity, equity and inclusion efforts or promote 'gender ideology extremism.' By a 5-4 vote, the justices lifted an order a federal court judge in Boston issued forcing the National Institutes of Health to restore funding for more than 1,700 grants focused on heart disease, HIV/AIDS, Alzheimer's disease, alcohol and substance abuse and mental health issues. Chief Justice John Roberts joined the court's liberals in dissent from the court's decision to permit the funding halt.
CNBC
an hour ago
- CNBC
Supreme Court allows Trump's cuts to health research grants over DEI policies
The Supreme Court on Thursday allowed Trump administration broad cuts to National Institutes of Health grants as part of the federal government's campaign against diversity, equity and inclusion policies. But in a mixed decision the court left in place a different part of the lower court judge's ruling that threw out the administration's guidance document that introduced the policy, raising questions about whether it can be applied moving forward. The justices, on a 5-4 vote, granted in part an emergency request filed by the administration seeking to put a Massachusetts-based federal judge's ruling on hold. The court did not fully explain its reasoning, but the majority indicated that groups seeking to challenge the funding cuts have to file separate lawsuits in a different federal venue — the Court of Federal Claims. Conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett was the deciding vote in crafting the decision. Four justices, all conservatives, said they would have granted the Trump administration's application in full, while four others — conservative Chief Justice John Roberts and the court's three liberals — would have denied it in full. "As today's order states, the District Court likely lacked jurisdiction to hear challenges to the grant terminations, which belong in the Court of Federal Claims," Barrett wrote in a concurring opinion. But, she added, "the Government is not entitled to a stay of the judgments insofar as they vacate the guidance documents." The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is a collection of agencies within the Department of Health and Human Services that receives billions of dollars from Congress to fund medical research at universities, hospitals and other institutions. When President Donald Trump took office in January, he vowed to end so-called diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI, policies, saying that rather than fostering equality as intended, they are a form of discrimination, primarily against white people. He has also taken aim at policies recognizing transgender rights, including access to gender transition care. The NIH then conducted a review of grants and determined that more than 1,700 of them were not consistent with Trump's directives and terminated them, including studies into HIV prevention and gender identity among teens. The moves were challenged by 16 states led by Massachusetts and the American Public Health Association, among others. After a trial, U.S. District Judge William Young in Massachusetts ruled that the government had failed to follow correct legal processes in implementing the policy, in violation of a law called the Administrative Procedure Act. In rushing to implement Trump's agenda, NIH "simply moved too fast and broke things, including the law," Young wrote. He also said that DEI was "an undefined enemy," noting that government lawyers had not been able to explain exactly what it meant. Young found that there was "pervasive racial discrimination" and "extensive discrimination" against gay, lesbian and transgender people in how grants were selected for termination. He also found "an unmistakable pattern of discrimination against women's health issues." Young declined to put his ruling on hold, as did the Boston-based 1st U.S Circuit Court of Appeals, which also kept the grants intact. In asking the Supreme Court to intervene on behalf of the Trump administration, Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued that the case is similar to another that arose in Massachusetts in which a judge blocked Trump administration plans to terminate teacher training grants on anti-DEI grounds. The Supreme Court in April blocked that ruling on a 5-4 vote. "This application presents a particularly clear case for this court to intervene and stop errant district courts from continuing to disregard this court's rulings," Sauer wrote. Lawyers for the states pushed back on Sauer's narrative, saying it "bears little resemblance to reality, with Young's ruling a "run-of-the mill" example of a court intervening when the government violates the law. The justices Thursday disagreed over whether the April decision governed the outcome in the latest case. In a brief opinion, Roberts, who dissented in the earlier case, said it was different, with Young's findings "well within the scope of the district court's jurisdiction." But conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch, in his own separate opinion, criticized Young for failing to abide by the April decision. "Lower court judges may sometimes disagree with this court's decisions, but they are never free to defy them," he wrote. The Trump administration has regularly turned to the Supreme Court when its broad use of executive power is challenged in court and has prevailed in the majority of cases. Trump and his allies have also harshly criticized judges who have ruled against him.
