If Illegals Aren’t Receiving Federal Medicaid Benefits, Why Are Blue States Suing to Protect Their Data?
“Democrats are playing a verbal shell game, pointing to federal law to say that Medicaid dollars can’t legally go to illegal aliens, so there is no money to be saved by cutting those funds off.”
Democrats have consistently maintained that while some illegal immigrants receive state-level Medicaid benefits, they do not receive federal Medicaid benefits. If that’s true, then why are Democratic attorneys general from blue states suing the federal government to prevent Medicaid data from being used for immigration enforcement? Are they genuinely concerned about potential violations of privacy laws, or more likely, are they attempting to protect those undocumented immigrants who may, in fact, be enrolled in federal Medicaid programs?
Led by California Attorney General Rob Bonta, 20 blue states have filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California alleging that the Trump administration “violated federal privacy laws when it turned over Medicaid data on millions of enrollees to deportation officials last month.”
Among the plaintiffs in the case are Illinois, New York, Minnesota, and Massachusetts, along with fifteen other states. Defendants include Health and Human Services Department Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.
Last month, The Associated Press reported that Kennedy’s advisors “ordered the release of a dataset that includes the private health information of people living in California, Illinois, Washington state, and Washington, D.C., to the Department of Homeland Security.”
CNN was careful to report that each of these states permit undocumented aliens “to enroll in Medicaid programs that pay for their expenses using only state taxpayer dollars.”
At any rate, according to CNN:
The unusual data sharing of private health information, including addresses, names, social security numbers, immigration status, and claims data for enrollees in those states, was released to deportation officials as they accelerated enforcement efforts across the country. The data could be used to help the Department of Homeland Security locate migrants in its mass deportation campaign, experts said.
During a Tuesday press conference Bonta noted that “the data release violates federal health privacy protection laws, including the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA).”
“This is about flouting seven decades of federal law policy and practice that have made it clear that personal healthcare data is confidential and can only be shared in certain narrow circumstances that benefit the public’s health or the Medicaid program,” he told reporters.
First of all, seven decades ago, no one could have possibly imagined that a U.S. president would ignore immigration laws and allow 15 million migrants to flow into the country illegally.
Second, although I am not a lawyer, it seems reasonable to assume that information sharing between government agencies is generally permissible and not even all that unusual. Moreover, I would argue that this situation just might represent one of those “narrow circumstances” in which such data sharing does serve the public interest — protecting both public health and the integrity of the Medicaid program — especially if it reveals that undocumented immigrants are receiving federal Medicaid funds.
HotAir’s David Strom states it plainly:
Democrats are playing a verbal shell game, pointing to federal law to say that Medicaid dollars can’t legally go to illegal aliens, so there is no money to be saved by cutting those funds off. At the same time, they are suing to hide the legal status of recipients to prevent them from facing ICE deportations–in other words, they are illegally spending Medicaid dollars for illegals and want to hide them from the feds.
The narratives don’t have to be consistent, right?
If you were to sit down and analyze what Democrats say to make their arguments on various issues, you would see narrative fails like this all the time. But because the issues are discussed in different contexts, the contradictions don’t stand out to many people.
Viewed from another perspective, if Medicaid benefits for undocumented immigrants are truly only a state issue, then why did this become a matter for the Senate Parliamentarian during consideration of a major federal spending bill? And why was it included in the Senate’s vote-a-rama on Monday, as I discussed here?
As Strom concludes, “The story is always changing to fit the desired result.”
It doesn’t have to make sense. Because they’re Democrats.
The Democrats claim no illegal aliens are on Medicaid. At the same time, suing to keep illegal aliens on Medicaid 😂
— Chuck Callesto (@ChuckCallesto) July 2, 2025
But they said illegals don’t get Medicaid. Gosh, how could this be? https://t.co/vKYJYKZYTw
— The🐰FOO (@PolitiBunny) July 3, 2025
Colorado and 19 other states sued the federal government Tuesday to prevent Medicaid data from being used for immigration enforcement. https://t.co/R1mabr3dX1
— The Denver Post (@denverpost) July 1, 2025
Elizabeth writes commentary for Legal Insurrection and The Washington Examiner. She is an academy fellow at The Heritage Foundation. Please follow Elizabeth on X or LinkedIn.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
I frankly don’t understand the byzantine accounting and regulations at work with state and federal medicaid programs. Assuming no federal dollars are going directly to illegals (a big, big, big assumption) would this allow states to shift more legal recipients to federally subsidized benefits and free up monies to illegals. In effect subsidizing illegals like planned parenthood subsidizes its abortion activities because money is fungible?
Yes. This is what people mean when they say money is fungible.
Kinda sorta. The whole point of Medicaid was that it was a joint sharing of expenses by the Federal and state governments — roughly 50/50, as it has been done over the years. The states originally were required to accede to Federal regulations on how the money was spent, but yes, over the years the states have staked out certain Medicaid ‘benefits’ within their states that they claimed were exclusively funded by the states. As an example, abortion. It was a convenience for the states as they didn’t have to set up a separate health care system for these exclusive benefits. But it’s also a canoodling, because we all know the money is commingled.
Agreed. The same goes for federal limits on how much state tax can be deducted for IRS filing. Without a limit the states just raise their tax with the knowledge the taxpayer will get to deduct it on IRS filings, thus the feds are subsidizing the state. That’s why they (high-tax states) squealed so loud when the limit on federal deductions was implemented.
If a state refuses to provide the information then the Feds should reduce funding by 10% a month.
They can’t unless Congress has explicitly made that condition; and even Congress can’t do it if the state would be left with no choice but to comply.
But none of that is relevant here, because what information are you talking about? The states are not in possession of any information that the feds want. The feds have the information we’re discussing here.
“If Illegals Aren’t Receiving Federal Medicaid Benefits, Why Are Blue States Suing to Protect Their Data?”
To ask the question is to answer it.
Yep, exactly. These States filing suit have probably not erected the ‘firewall’ between Federal funded Medicaid program/services/administration and their State programs for illegal immigrants. IMO unless they created entirely separate, parallel systems… to include operational costs like separate buildings to house the function, personnel cost payroll for those who administer it heck separate sign up forms… they’ve willingly and definitely
acted to create an impermissible co mingling of the Federal funds.
I guess my question is, do illegal aliens presumably taking only state money for Medicaid show up in any reports that the state has to make to the feds?
If the answer is no, then “our side’s” arguments here make sense.
If the answer is yes, then the states are objecting the feds assembling a “Medicaid registry” of these names for deportation purposes, which is exactly the same as gun owners objecting to the feds assembling a gun ownership registry for confiscation purposes.
It’s an interesting point. Suppose Illinois (which requires, in obvious defiance of the 2A, that all firearms owners must have an identification card, a ‘FOID card’) allowed illegal aliens to obtain a FOID card (why in the world such a person would want one is to be left unaddressed in this thought experiment). Then suppose the Federal government demanded the list of FOID card holders so as identify who is illegal. One can see the issue.
Part of the issue is state agency — if the states have some independent role in a federal republic then there is a point where the states can say to the Feds, “no, you can’t have that.”
But for Medicaid, if the Federal money is thorough commingled, the Feds have a right (per the courts, repeatedly) to audit how the money is spent, and that would include identification of all beneficiaries, legal and otherwise. Especially otherwise, as the Feds could (for example) sue the illegal aliens to retrieve the funds, or even arrest them for fraud.
I think the key difference in the thought experiment here (outside the 2A issue) is that since fedgov is not paying for the FOID cards, fedgov has no (fiscal) right to know who is receiving them. By contrast, since fedgov IS paying for ‘medical care,’ fedgov has the right to ensure that that money is not being spent in illicit ways. This is, essentially, an audit.
I’d agree; if law permits, fedgov should have the right to take information about law-breaking from an audit to pass to DOJ. After all, if a provider or patient was bilking Medicaid we’d all want that stopped. And illegals are by definition breaking the law. So I don’t see a problem, though your average Democrat will.
The States are objecting to being exposed in co mingling funds in violation of Medicare program rules and potentially opening them up to prosecution.
No alien, especially an illegal Alien, is supposed to become a ‘public charge’ for the Federal Govt. I suspect that CA among other jurisdictions hasn’t set up their State programs to be completely separate from Medicare. As for a ‘registry’…nah Cuz… they gonna have to suck it up. If they were worried about a ‘list’ being used to ID and track them then they should keep themselves off the list by declining to sign up which was their option v a non optional firearms registry.
Not exactly the same at all. You have a constitutional right to keep and bear arms. Illegals have no due process right to remain in this country.
They have no due process right to Medicaid either. While, I believe, all people have a right to access of medical care (I don’t mean that in the Leftist sense) no one has a right to have their medical care paid for by someone else (unless a minor child being paid for by parent(s)).
Except it’s not the same, because government-provided healthcare, if it is a “right” at all, is not a human (natural) right, but a civil right. Civil rights are subject to whatever limitations the government deigns to impose, along with the imposition of obligations and responsibilities upon those seeking the benefit of many such rights. Human rights (such as the rights to life and to liberty, both of which further imply a right the tools necessary to maintain and protect those rights) emanate from our status as “humans”, not from the governments we construct. Any “right” that depends upon the existence of a government is a civil right, not a human right.
The government has no authority to know if, how, or when you’re exercising a natural right. It has every right to know who is receiving which government benefits, and if those people receiving the benefits qualify for them.
I agree with most of what you’ve said. However… if we stipulate the claim that the feds had no part in signing up these illegals or funding their medical care (“it was all state money”), then the feds demanding that portion of the patient roster are in violation of cases such as Prinz v. US (the feds have no right to make the states do the feds’ jobs for them for free).
I guess I’m too simple to understand the problem. The desired data – name, SSN, address, immigration data, is NOT medical data, and thus doesn’t seem to be protected by the intent of the law which is to shield people from having their medical data revealed. The request is simply for data about WHO is in the list of those receiving benefits, not WHY or what conditions any individual may have.
Could one simply make a database, name it HIPA, and refuse to release that any content from it? If so, since no one is allowed to look into HIPA files, you could arguably hide -anything- in it safe from government examination.
Hmmmm.
I pay $1200 a month for healthcare (with a substantial deductible), but illegals get their healthcare paid by my tax dollars. A pox on these leftist criminals and their RINO enablers.
This must end, cut these parasites off.
It should be mentioned that the states that are suing may not know or care if they have actual grounds or need to sue.
My state, NY, is one of the states that is suing. Our Attorney General Letitia “Real Estate” James has based her career around hating president Trump and doing anything at all to hurt him.
That she would oppose his agenda just for the sake of opposition (and fund raising) is a given. That she’s a poor lawyer is also a given. There may not be any more reason to it than that.
(Which doesn’t mean that illegal aliens aren’t getting federal Medicaid money illegally. When the mavens of NY want to do something, they assume it’s legal FOR THEM even when it’s clearly illegal for everyone else)
Some of this is very smart tree-shaking by the Trump administration. Illegal aliens who have been here several years and accessing various Fed government services with the blessing of their local Dem governments now face a decision: Stay, be found due to information they gave to the local Dems, and forcefully deported with no legal path to return, or self-deport with $1000 cash and a promise that they can apply to return legally in the future. Self-deportation also lets them take bank accounts and cash, something the cartels strip from them when they were smuggled in. That’s a heck of a carrot and a stick.
The fact that dramacrats do everything they can do protect illegal alien colonists and settlers against the very citizens whose rights they are elected to and sworn to protect shows you everything you need to know about both the dramacrat party and democracy in general. The dramacrat part are elitist stupid scum and democracy fails harder the more stupid and selfish the population is. Our population is very stupid and selfish and is purposively get dumber thanks to the efforts of dramacrats.
“And as I’ve mentioned, we’ve all been quite content to demean government, drop civics and in general conspire to produce an unaware and compliant citizenry. The unawareness remains strong but compliance is obviously fading rapidly. This problem demands some serious, serious thinking – and not just poll driven, demographically-inspired messaging.”
Bill Ivey to John Podesta
3/13/16
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/3599
You have to realize that to Leftists, which is who govern the states suing, the law is only mandatory for non-Leftists. They may do, and subsidize with tax money, anything that they want to. Especially if it harms non-Leftists which is one of their life goals.
Subotai Bahadur
They can, have and will do just that… so long as those responsible for monitoring and policing such things continued to turn a blind eye. Unfortunately the blind eye has been turned so long that these folks now feel entitled to continue their shenanigans despite the long standing prohibitions against it. As the kids say ‘there’s a new Sheriff’ and he’s focusing in on fraud, waste, abuse and mal administration of Federal tax dollars that’s gone unchecked for far too long. The lefty outrage in response is gonna get turned up to eleventy.
Every swinging d**k in the federal government who performs their functions with a delegation of authority that came down the chain of command from the POTUS is a representative of the POTUS and might as well be the POUTUS. Everything they do is done for the POTUS and in the name of the POTUS. Transferring data from one such set of delegates one agency to another set of such delegates in another agency is not much different than the POTUS himself taking the data and transferring it from one hand to the other.
Standard Democrat defense of the indefensible.
1) It’s not happening.
2) It’s not common why are you so worried about it.
3) It is happening and it’s a good thing.
There’s another point: MN’s House speaker, Melissa Hortman, was murdered allegedly because she voted with Republicans to repeal taxpayer-funded healthcare coverage for adult illegal immigrants.
It appears that Ds stop at nothing to protect grift. Can RFK say no funds until we get the lists? OR put a time limit on it??? IF the states stall, the time limit is extended.
Who alleged that?
The shooter appears to be a lunatic who thinks Tim Walz ordered him to do the shootings. Nothing to do with Hortman’s vote on that measure, pursuant to an arrangement between the parties. She didn’t vote for it because she wanted it, she voted for it because as party leader she had promised to deliver enough Dem votes to pass it, in return for the Reps doing the same for a Dem bill.
In California we have citizen initiatives that allow the people to vote on new. We could propose an initiative that requires the state to report illegals to the federal government.
I have grave doubts about the possibility of that happening. It would be opposed at all costs by the Nomenklatura there, the steps to get something on the ballot will be stalled forever, and basically most California voters are on the other side.
Subotai Bahadur
I read an article detailing how it all works out a while back. I can’t remember exactly how it’s done but it basically comes down to the D Party enrolling their illegals in State Medicare, paying for it with state funds and then recovering their costs from the federal government.
It’s a messed up way for them to attract illegals, thus keeping their populations high and giving them more supporters.
Until we get in-person voting with a thumb dipped in blue ink, every election in a blue state will be questionable. They will fight tooth and nail to keep anything they don’t like off the ballot, and you can be certain the count will be deliberately skewed to the result they want if plan A doesn’t work. Everyone hates the homeless in Portland, but somehow 60% vote to spend obscene amounts of money on them.
Smackdown today in Arizona over this issue:
Rep. Gillette Mocks AG Mayes For Lawsuit Against Federal Agencies’ Administrative Data Sharing
“”Administrative data sharing with DHS, DOJ, HHS is lawful. The state agreed to the terms when they took the matching funds. 42CFR 431 privacy act, every service member knows this is only protected from non govt use.”
Leave a Comment