temporary restraining
Vermont Legal Aid claims state ‘harmed’ vulnerable people by kicking them out of hotels | Local News
BURLINGTON — A Chittenden County judge has issued a temporary restraining order preventing the state from kicking three homeless people out of hotels.
On March 15, Vermont Legal Aid filed a suit on behalf of Groundworks Collaborative in Brattleboro and other service providers after the Agency of Human Services announced it was ending vouchers for some people housed in hotels under the state’s emergency housing initiative that fell out of the COVID -19 pandemic.
The service agencies claim they have had to divert resources away from their core activities to try to help as many people as possible through this process.
In the filing, the VLA sought a temporary restraining order to keep people in their rooms, but Judge Helen Toor denied the motion, stating courts have held that “a forced significant change in an organization’s programs could constitute irreparable harm.”
“However, the harm alleged here is not so severe,” wrote Toor in his decision. “A temporary diversion of resources, as opposed to a forced change in an organization’s core mission, is not sufficient to establish irreparable harm.”
The issue arose last Friday after the state announced it was opening four temporary night shelters to house anyone displaced by loss of a voucher. In Brattleboro, a last minute location was found at the old Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee administrative offices on Old Ferry Road after a location in Bennington was deemed too hazardous because it was contaminated with lead and PCBs.
After Toor denied the request for an injunction, VLA filed for another on Tuesday, adding three individuals as plaintiffs in the suit.
“Two of these individual plaintiffs are a couple who are eligible because one is 66 years old and the other has several disabilities, but they were not told about the expanded eligibility and were incorrectly told on
Attorney general’s emergency rule won’t go into effect until May 1
A circuit court judge issued a ruling that will delay the implementation of Attorney General Andrew Bailey’s emergency rule restricting gender-affirming health care. The rule will not go into effect until 5 pm on May 1, according to court records.
St. Louis County Circuit Court Judge Ellen Ribaudo issued the stay of enforcement that would allow the court time to “review the briefing sufficiently.” According to court records, Ribaudo anticipates having a ruling on a request by the ACLU of Missouri and Lambda Legal for a temporary restraining order by May 1. The ACLU and Lambda Legal, along with Bryan Cave Leighton, LLP, are representing Southampton Community Healthcare.
more: Legal advocates file petition that could block Missouri AG’s rule to restrict trans care
“While we welcome this temporary relief, we look forward to the judge ultimately preventing this rule from going into effect,” the ACLU of Missouri and Lambda Legal said in a joint statement.
The ruling comes after the case was bounced from the state court to the federal court, sent back down to the state court, and transferred to a different judge.
On April 26, Attorney General Andrew Bailey moved Southampton Community Healthcare v. Bailey, which asked for a temporary restraining order against Bailey’s emergency rule, from a state court to a federal court.
In the notice of removal filed by Missouri’s Solicitor General Joshua Divine, the notice cites 28 USC § 1331, which gives district courts jurisdiction over “civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States.” In Southampton Community Healthcare’s request for a temporary restraining order, they allege that the emergency rule violates the US Constitution as well as the Missouri Constitution, therefore, Bailey argues, the case falls under federal jurisdiction.