As the only national legal organization focused on advancing equity and protecting the rights of low-income older adults, we are uniquely positioned to drive change through the courts. Our attorneys have a deep understanding of the intricacies of the complex health care and economic security programs that low-income older adults rely on and know when barriers to services violate their rights.
When developing litigation, we partner with advocates on the ground who help us identify and monitor serious systemic issues that impact groups of low-income older adults. We then partner with those on-the-ground advocates and our pro-bono partners from top law firms across the country to file and win cases that bring justice to large groups of plaintiffs.
Throughout our more than 50 year history we have litigated landmark cases that provide sweeping relief to low-income older adults across the country, leading to the return of billions of dollars worth of vital benefits.
The suit charges that SSA discriminated against these individuals for months, and in some cases more than a year, after that discrimination was held unlawful by the Supreme Court when it struck down the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in June 2013.
This class action lawsuit was filed against the Social Security Administration (SSA) on behalf of about 4,000 residents in the San Francisco Bay Area and Central Coast whose disability benefits were denied or terminated based on the reports of a discredited physician.
This case challenged the Social Security Administration (SSA)'s reliance on outstanding probation and parole warrants as a basis for denying benefits to older adults and people with disabilities.
Justice in Aging filed these amicus briefs with the Center for Medicare Advocacy, SAGE, and pro bono counsel Stinson LLP. The briefs urge the Fifth Circuit to consider the discriminatory barriers to accessing health and long-term care transgender older adults will face if the lower courts’ preliminary injunctions stand. The preliminary injunctions bar the inclusion of discrimination on the basis of gender identity as a form of sex discrimination in the Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) final rule implementing Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act.
Justice in Aging filed these amicus briefs with the Center for Medicare Advocacy, SAGE, and pro bono counsel Stinson LLP. The briefs urge the Fifth Circuit to consider the discriminatory barriers to accessing health and long-term care transgender older adults will face if the lower courts’ preliminary injunctions stand. The preliminary injunctions bar the inclusion of discrimination on the basis of gender identity as a form of sex discrimination in the Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) final rule implementing Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act.
Justice in Aging joined this amicus brief filed by AARP along with the Center for Medicare Advocacy and the Medicare Rights Center urging the federal court to reject claims filed by the pharmaceutical company, AstraZeneca, contending that the Medicare drug negation is unconstitutional. In August, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced the first 10 drugs that would be subject to negotiations with Medicare as part of the Inflation Reduction Act. This list included the drug Farxiga, a diabetes medication distributed by AstraZeneca.
