DeWine administration sued over COVID unemployment funds
COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) — A group of Ohioans and former Ohio Attorney General Mark Dann scored a major victory when a Franklin County judge ordered Gov. Mike DeWine to recoup $900 million he declined from the federal government for unemployment in 2021.
A class-action lawsuit was filed against the governor on behalf of those who were receiving unemployment benefits during that time. Franklin County Judge Michael Holbrook ruled that DeWine turning away $900 million in federal unemployment benefits was against state law.
Ohio State students create dating app with safety as top priority
DeWine ended the Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation program 10 weeks early in 2021. That program paid out an additional $300 per week to Ohioans receiving unemployment benefits. More than 300,000 people were receiving benefits from the pandemic-fueled program.
'I couldn't make the rent,' one of the lawsuit's plaintiffs, Michelle Carr, said. 'I was unemployed. I went out looking for jobs throughout. You know, I live in a small town. There really ain't a whole, whole lot here.'
'We put all of our faith in him,' another plaintiff in the lawsuit, Justin Pertuset, said. 'And we feel like he let us down, and he still is. It's not about, you know, Republican, Democrat. It's just about doing the right thing.'
Attorneys for the governor's office have filed an appeal to the ruling.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
6 minutes ago
- The Hill
Vance on LA unrest: Newsom should ‘look in mirror' and stop blaming Trump
Vice President JD Vance on Tuesday tore into California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) for suggesting the unrest in Los Angeles is a consequence of federal involvement in state and local law enforcement efforts. 'Gavin Newsom says he didn't have a problem until Trump got involved,' Vance wrote in a post on X, attaching two photos that he said were taken before Trump ordered the National Guard to protect border patrol agents in California. One depicted rioters appearing to attack a 'border patrol' van, and another depicted a car set ablaze. The Hill was not able to verify the authenticity of the photos. 'Does this look like 'no problem'?' Vance asked. Vance suggested Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass 'fomented and encouraged the riots,' with the goal of promoting mass migration into the U.S., adding, 'It is their reason for being.' 'If you want to know why illegal aliens flocked to your state, stop accusing Donald Trump. Look in the mirror,' Vance said. 'If you want to know why border patrol fear for their lives over enforcing the law, look in the mirror.' Vance pointed to California's Medicaid expansion last year to low-income undocumented immigrants as an example of a policy that has 'encouraged mass migration into California.' Newsom has since proposed ending new Medicaid enrollment for undocumented adults, but his proposal faces resistance from the state legislature. 'Your policies that protected those migrants from common sense law enforcement. Your policies that offered massive welfare benefits to reward illegal immigrants. Your policies that allowed those illegal migrants (and their sympathizers) to assault our law enforcement. Your policies that allowed Los Angeles to turn into a war zone,' Vance continued. 'You sure as hell had a problem before President Trump came along. The problem is YOU,' Vance added. Vance's post is the latest in a back-and-forth between the administration and Newsom, who has resisted Trump's extraordinary steps to deploy 4,000 National Guard troops to the area and mobilize 700 active-duty marines. Newsom has insisted that the situation was under control before the Trump administration escalated tensions by making a provocative show of force. He accused Trump of 'intentionally causing chaos, terrorizing communities and endangering the principles of our great democracy.' After Trump suggested his border czar arrest Newsom, the California governor responded by saying, 'The President of the United States just called for the arrest of a sitting Governor. This is a day I hoped I would never see in America.' 'I don't care if you're a Democrat or a Republican this is a line we cannot cross as a nation — this is an unmistakable step toward authoritarianism,' Newsom added Monday afternoon. Vance then replied to Newsom, saying, 'Do your job. That's all we're asking.' 'Do YOUR job. We didn't have a problem until Trump got involved. Rescind the order. Return control to California,' Newsom responded, prompting Vance's latest response.
Axios
9 minutes ago
- Axios
Impeachment wars
Rep. Jasmine Crockett's mere mention of a possible impeachment inquiry into President Trump has touched off negative reactions from some colleagues. "I think she's going to turn off a lot more people than gain," a House Democrat told us. Why it matters: House Democratic leaders are staying neutral. But many Democrats are allergic to the word after they impeached Trump twice only for him to return to power with full control of the government. Crockett (D-Texas), asked in a local news interview if she would pursue impeachment if Democrats retook the House in 2026 and she became Oversight Committee chair, said she would "absolutely at least do an inquiry." The other three candidates for the ranking member job on Oversight, Reps. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.), Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.) and Kweisi Mfume (D-Md.), told us they wouldn't go that far. 👿 "Turning this ranker race into a proxy for impeachment is unhelpful and unfair to her colleagues," said a House Democrat who predicted Republicans will "try to motivate their base by saying that a Democratic majority will inevitably lead to impeachment." Crockett told us the term "impeachment inquiry" would stress to the public the "next level of gravity" of the subject matter — such as Trump's pardons for big money allies and the Qatari jet scandal. "A lot of times we as Democrats can overthink stuff," Crockett said. "A lot of people ... felt like [Oversight Committee chair] James Comer was an embarrassment. But at the end of the day, who won the House?" The bottom line: House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries deferred to House Judiciary Committee ranking member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), whose panel, he said, "has jurisdiction over impeachment."
Fox News
11 minutes ago
- Fox News
NY lawmaker lambastes failed commemoration of Oct 7 attack, as Dem leadership accused of 'antisemitism'
The New York assemblyman behind an effort to formally commemorate the Oct. 7, 2023, terror attack in Israel lambasted leadership for tanking what was supposed to be a "poignant" bill remembering the tragedy. Assemblyman Lester Chang, R-Brooklyn – one of the few GOP members from New York City in the 103-47 Democratic-majority chamber – said he had been working on a resolution for New York state to officially remember the terror attack since hostage negotiations began a year ago. "I'm a Navy veteran of 24 years and I did a tour in Afghanistan. So I understand what war is all about," said Chang. "I've seen atrocities out there." Once American figures like then-candidate Donald Trump began helping hostage negotiations, Chang said he directed his staff to craft a message – which he said took more than a month of back-and-forth to make sure it was "balanced" and did not have a partisan streak. "We submitted it in January, as a resolution, and it was rejected… because [leadership] said it was 'controversial,'" Chang said. "We were astounded but not surprised. So we converted it to a bill," he said, adding that, in the end, a bill would be better because a resolution only commemorates an event for that year, while a bill would codify the remembrance for eternity. With a handful of Democratic co-sponsors, Chang and colleagues believed they had the right balance to attempt to put it up for a vote, but as the New York Post reported, it was reportedly ultimately blocked by House Speaker Carl Heastie, D-Bronx, and other top Democrats. Chang said the bill, destined for the smaller governmental operations committee, was redirected to the larger Ways and Means committee, and that four members were "switched out." The top Republican on that panel, Assemblyman Ed Ra, told the New York Post that remembering Oct. 7 and/or combating antisemitism should never be "political." Republican Assemblyman Ari Brown, who, like Ra, represents Long Island, accused Albany Democrats of "veiled antisemitism," telling the Post the legislature is "rotten" with it. The assembly also tanked a resolution from Brown that complimented Chang's bill. Compounding that was, as Chang described, no GOP bills have been successfully put through the process at all this session. "Having me as a Republican [sponsor] – that would [procedurally] choke them – not because of me, the person, but as a member of that party." Chang said he would just as soon "give this bill to a Democrat" to sponsor if it meant commemorating the Oct. 7 attack. He added that, as a person of Chinese ancestry who represents largely Asian and Italian Bensonhurst, he has no religious horse in the race. "That should make it more poignant as a non-Jewish person pushing this bill in a mostly Christian and Buddhist district," he said. At least seven Democrats did come out in support of the Oct. 7 remembrance legislation, all of whom hail from New York City. Senate Minority Leader Rob Ortt, R-Niagara Falls, echoed Chang's concerns in comments to Fox News Digital. "Many New Yorkers had loved ones injured or worse in the terror attacks in Israel on Oct. 7," Ortt said. "The least we can do is commemorate this tragic day." "Instead of taking commonsense action, Albany Democrats would rather play politics, and have time and again refused to defend our Jewish brothers and sisters." Fox News Digital reached out to Heastie for comment and response to the allegations but did not hear back.
