ASSOCIATION OF SOCIAL WORK BOARDS

Transcription

1 ASSOCIATION OF SOCIAL WORK BOARDS Top Recent Regulatory Cases November 8, :00pm 2:30pm

2 Introductions.. Dale Atkinson, Esq. ASWB General Counsel Atkinson & Atkinson 1466 Techny Road Northbrook, Illinois fax ASWB ASPPB FSMTB AAVSB ARBO FSBPT FCLB ICFSEB NABP ACPE MACTE JRCERT FARB NMTCB OTHERS..

3 A few social work cases.. On the Internet nobody knows you re a dog.

4 What is a client Clark v. Board of Registration of Social Workers The full Supreme Court of Massachusetts affirmed the opinion of a single justice and held that the board acted within its authority when it suspended the license of a clinical social worker following an investigation related to a variety of misconduct violations. The licensee was employed as part of an employee assistance program, whereby the employer sought her assessment of individuals whose mental health was of concern. She spent six sessions with an individual (employee), after 3 of which she determined no mental health issue existed. Over the next couple of months, the licensee s own mental health began to deteriorate and she was eventually admitted to a residential treatment facility. Her treatment plan upon release including meeting with a psychiatrist and taking medication in order to treat depression and bipolar disorder, among other afflictions. During the time of her decline in mental health and continuing throughout her residential treatment, she repeatedly contacted the employee by phone and mail. She also had professional contact with other clients during the same time frame. Within a few months, she opened an office within 100 yards of the employee s workplace, prompting him to contact the police, who, in turn, contacted the Board. The Board suspended her license for a minimum of 5 years for attempting to engage in a dual relationship and for practicing while impaired.

5 Clark..cont. The licensee argued that she did not provide social work services to the employee because she did not treat him and that he therefore was not a client. Thus, she could not have violated laws governing the social worker-client relationship. The Board regulations define social work services as the application of social work theory and specialized clinical knowledge and methods to assess, diagnose, prevent and treat mental, emotional or behavioral disorders, conditions or addictions. The licensee claimed that the regulation requires her to have performed all of the actions included in the definition in order to qualify as having engaged in social work services. Given that the Employee was found to not be suffering from mental illness, she did not treat him and therefore could not be found to have provided social work services. The Court disagreed, and noted that [I]t is unreasonable to interpret the regulation to mean that a social worker who meets with an individual and determines that the individual does not have a mental disorder has not provided social work services. The regulation clearly provides a range of services that a social worker might provide in the course of his or her practice. The Licensee was hired to meet with the Employee and assess his mental health, which satisfies the definition of social work services.

6 Criminal Acts Dela Torre v. Board of Behavioral Sciences, Department of Consumer Affairs California Court of Appeals affirmed lower court and upheld stayed revocation and 3 year probation period of LCSW criminally convicted of misdemeanor grand theft related to the misappropriation of over $48K of child welfare agency funds through use of an agency issued credit card. The court found a nexus between the criminal conviction and acts which lead to the conviction and the qualifications, functions and duties of a person holding a license. The court also held that the statute of limitations began to run upon the criminal conviction, not the commission of the crime. Finally, the court noted that the expungement of the criminal conviction did not act as a bar to consideration by the Board in determining administrative guilt and determining the sanctions to impose. (social worker, criminal conviction, nexus to qualifications, expunge) ASWB 10/2012

7 A few important cases

8 Out of State Acts Ryser v. State of Kansas; Kansas Board of Healing Arts et al Write-up: Kansas Supreme Court affirmed lower court and upheld the denial of physician s attempt to revoke subpoena issued by Kansas Board of Healing Arts for medical records related to practice on a patient in Missouri. Court held that the licensee was not required to exhaust administrative remedies before seeking judicial review of the validity of the subpoena. On the merits, the court held that the board had the authority to issue a subpoena to a Kansas licensee for events that took place in Missouri because the Kansas practice act provided grounds for discipline for such acts outside the state. The Kansas board investigation was stimulated by a civil action filed by a Missouri patient against the licensee. The physician was licensed in both Kansas and Missouri. Key terms: physician, subpoena, out of state acts, grounds for discipline, exhaust administrative remedies

9 Unlicensed Practice Fines Tran v. Board of Chiropractic Examiners Write-up: The Court of Appeals of Oregon affirmed the lower court and held that the Board had the authority to discipline the plaintiff and impose a penalty of more than $200,000 for more than 800 violations of the practice act, mostly related to unlicensed practice. The plaintiff is the owner of two wellness centers where he employed a licensed chiropractor, who was under the impression that the plaintiff was a licensed naturopathic physician. The plaintiff examined and treated numerous patients and forged the chiropractor s name on charts, insurance forms and x-ray orders. The plaintiff argued that the Board had no authority over him because he did not possess a license in chiropractic, but the Court disagreed. The statute clearly states that no person may practice chiropractic without a license and that the Board may discipline a person for violations of the statute. The Court went into a lengthy opinion regarding numerous changes to the law over time and interpreted the statute as applying to anyone, not just licensees. The plaintiff also failed on his argument that the Board could only fine him up to $10,000 totally because the statute did not expressly state that such amount could be applied per violation. The Court interpreted the statute in the opposite manner, however, and allowed to the Board to impose a $10,000 penalty per violation. Key terms: chiropractic, unlicensed practice, penalty, statutory interpretation

10 Permanent Revocation.Notice Richmond v. Ohio Board of Nursing The Court of Appeals in Ohio affirmed the Court of Common Pleas and held that the Board could permanently revoke a nurse s license after she violated the terms of a prior consent order with the Board. The consent order mandated that, while the license was indefinitely suspended, she must refrain from alcohol and drug use and that she submit periodic urine samples. She failed to provide urine samples on numerous occasions and tested positive for cocaine. The nurse signed for certified mail delivery of the Board s notice that it intended to revoke her license, but she did not request a hearing on the matter. She did not appear at hearing and the Board revoked the license. On appeal, the nurse claimed that the notice served on her was insufficient in that it incorrectly referred to her license as an RN as opposed to an LPN. The court held that there was no due process violation because the notice was reasonable calculated to apprise the nurse of the board s proposed action, particularly because the prior consent order was attached and references thereto were included in the notice. Key terms: nurse, substance use, consent order, permanent revocation, notice, due process

11 Application Denial.Endorsement Substantial Equivalence State Committee for Marital and Family Therapists v. Haynes The Missouri Court of Appeals overturned the Administrative Hearing Commission s decision to grant Haynes motion for summary decision after her application for licensure was denied. Haynes applied for licensure by reciprocity as a marital and family therapist and the Committee denied her request. The Commission reversed and found that the requirements for licensure in Kansas (where she was duly licensed) were substantially the same as those in Missouri. The Court disagreed, finding that where Missouri required 2 years of postgraduate clinical training and a certain amount of coursework in diagnostic systems, Kansas required neither. Additionally, while Haynes scored high enough on the uniform licensure exam to pass in Kansas, her score fell six points below that which was required in Missouri. Key terms: therapist, reciprocity, denial of licensure, exam score

12 Reciprocal Discipline Rule v. Policy Texas State Board of Pharmacy v. Witcher The Texas Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court and upheld a remand to the Texas board to determine the appropriate sanction against a Texas licensed pharmacist whose license in North Carolina was suspended for issues related to alcohol abuse. The Texas board, in keeping with previously articulated policy that a pharmacist with an active suspension in another state cannot practice pharmacy in Texas, determined an indefinite suspension against the Texas license pending the successful completion of rehabilitation program in North Carolina and reinstatement of practice privileges in North Carolina. The court held that such a policy was actually a rule in that it applied not just to the licensee at issue, but to all pharmacists licensed in more than one state. The court noted that the licensee was not seeking to evade compliance with the NC imposed sanction, but merely returned to Texas, her home state, upon the death of her husband. Key terms: pharmacist, reciprocal discipline, rule, policy, concurrent sanctions

13 Lettuce begin with a picture.. Sorry if it s cheesy.

14 Legal, Ethical, and Legislative Updates Video time. John Rosemond, psychologist: 13 New Orleans tour guides: Texas online veterinarian: North Carolina Caveman Blogger: Washington D.C. tour guides: Florida interior designers:

15 Legal, Ethical, and Legislative Updates In the News. N.J. gay conversion therapy ban challenged in federal court. National catholic Rptr. August 27, 2013 Bill Would Crack Down on Therapeutic Treatments by Unlicensed Individuals PolitickerNJ.com June 6, 2013 Rx: Slow down Psychologists and mental health medicines Chicago Tribune May 13, 2013 Drug bill advances for psychologists Chicago Tribune March 13, 2013

16 Michigan freedom of conscience act Michigan legislature is considering bill that would allow students in psychology, counseling, and social work to refuse to provide services to a client. Refusal must be based on genuine religious or moral beliefs that conflict with the counseling objectives Educational institution may not punish student for refusal Refusal only acceptable if referral is made to willing student counselor HB5040 passed, referred to Comm. On Govt Operations

17 Freedom of conscience laws Refer to a professional s right or liberty of conscience with regard to refusal of certain services 2012: Kansas enacted SB 62 that allows individual from having to prescribe any device or drug which results in the termination of a pregnancy. IL Health Care Right to Conscience Act: Regs adopted required pharmacists to fill prescriptions for contraception; defeated by IL Appellate Court in suit brought by pharmacists. Nebraska: FOC Act stuck in judiciary committee

18 Conversion therapy ban California 2012 law bans gay conversion therapy (SB 1172) Prohibits a mental health provider from engaging in sexual orientation change efforts with a patient under 18 years of age. 9 th Circuit Ct. of Appeals stopped implementation pending resolution of case filed challenging that law violates free speech. At issue: violation of free speech and religious rights; jeopardizing livelihood of therapists and counselors. Law upheld in August 2013 opinion.

19 Pickup v. Brown th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a District Court (grant of a preliminary injunction in Welch v. Brown) and affirmed District Court in alternative case (denial of preliminary injunction Pickup v. Brown) regarding a statute that bans state-based licensed mental health providers from engaging in sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE) with patients under 18 years of age. The court held that the legislation regulates conduct, not speech and was therefore subject to a rational basis legal review (rather than strict scrutiny). Recognizing the police powers of California, the court held that legislation prohibiting the administration of therapies found to be harmful addresses conduct and the fact that speech may be used to carry out such therapies does not implicate prohibitions of speech.

20 Pickup.cont. Court also stated that prohibitions of conduct have never been deemed an abridgement of freedom of speech. Further, communications that occur during psychoanalysis is entitled to constitutional protection, but is not immune from regulation.

21 Pickup.cont. Conclusions: Dr.-patient communication about medical treatment receives substantial First Amendment protection, but the government has more leeway to regulate the conduct necessary to administer the treatment. Psychotherapists are not entitled to special First Amendment protection merely because the mechanism used to deliver mental health treatment is the spoken word. Nevertheless, communication that occurs during psychotherapy does receive some constitutional protection, but is not immune from regulation.

22 In the news Doctor Tells Obama Supporters: Go Elsewhere for Health Care. Orlando Sentinel. April 2, A doctor who considers the national health-care overhaul to be bad medicine for the country posted a sign on his office door telling patients who voted for President Barack Obama to seek care elsewhere. The sign reads: If you voted for Obama seek urologic care elsewhere. Changes to your healthcare begin right now, not in four years. Cassell may be walking a thin line between his right to free speech and his professional obligation, said William Allen, professor of bioethics, law and medical professionalism at the University of Florida s College of Medicine

23 SOL/Rule of Repose Alabama Board of Examiners of Psychology v. Hamilton Write-up: Alabama Court of Appeals reversed circuit court and reinstated discipline rendered by the Board to a psychologist for boundary acts that occurred more than 28 years ago. After entering a stay on the sanctions, the circuit court reversed the Board action finding that the rule of repose and/or the statute of limitations barred the administrative action. The court of appeals reversed the circuit court holding that the defense of laches was not substantiated by the licensee who argued destruction of records and witness credibility. It noted that the voluminous administrative record that does exist leads the court to conclude that it was not too late to ascertain the merits of the controversy. Further, the court found that the rule of repose is a creature of common law and that failure to apply the doctrine cannot be held to be an error of law, the standard by which appellate review is judged. Finally, the rejection of the common law rule of repose did not implicate any constitutional due process rights. Thus, the court of appeals reversed the lower court and reinstated the Board sanctions. Key terms: psychologist, 28 years, statute of limitations, rule of repose, prejudice, deference

24 Freedom of Religion Ward v. Polite Write-up: United States Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed lower court grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants and reinstated case by counseling student dismissed from graduate level program based upon request to reassign practicum same sex clients due to religious beliefs. Student argued First Amendment rights to exercise religious beliefs. Lower court awarded summary judgment in favor of school that dismissed student from program based upon violations of ACA Code of Ethics related to counseling goals and discrimination based on sexual orientation. 6 th Circuit reversed finding that the case deserved to go to a jury on factual issues, including the fact that the ACA Code of Ethics provides for and actually encourages referrals of clients based upon many circumstances and that universities are granted wide latitude to academic freedom but are not expression free enclaves when it comes to the First Amendment.

25 Freedom of Speech Tatro v. University of Minnesota Write-up: Minnesota Supreme Court affirmed the lower court and upheld the sanction imposed by a university to a mortuary arts student for Facebook posts which violated school policies and were deemed disrespectful to a human cadaver. Under a First Amendment challenge, the Supreme Court rejected the standard applied by the court of appeals (did the expression substantially and materially disrupt the work and discipline of the school) but affirmed nonetheless. The Supreme Court found that the Facebook posts were not school sponsored speech and, instead, applied the standard of whether the academic program rules are narrowly tailored and directly related to established professional conduct standards. The court found such rules to be narrowly tailored, that the prohibited speech was not private (by virtue of the public nature of Facebook), and the court rejected the student s arguments that the postings were unrelated to any course work and were merely satirical literary expression. The court also limited the students challenge to the constitutionality of the decision as she only referenced such argument in the petition. Finally, the court upheld the sanctions imposed as reasonable.

26 Freedom of Speech Cooksey v. Futrell Write-up: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit vacated and remanded the District Court s dismissal of Plaintiff s First Amendment challenge to the North Carolina Board s enforcement of the dietetic/nutrition act enforcement against his website. Plaintiff operated a website promoting the caveman diet and other dietary and lifestyle advice. The Board warned Plaintiff of the practice act and unlicensed practice issues and Plaintiff modified his site. Thereafter, he filed suit arguing his First Amendment rights and the lower court dismissed the matter finding no harm to the Plaintiff. On appeal, the 4 th Circuit vacated addressing the justiciability of the allegations or standing. It held the Plaintiff satisfied the threshold of injury in fact as the Board action had a chilling effect on Plaintiff s speech. With injury in fact met, the court noted Plaintiff easily satisfied the remaining 2 issues related to standing, causation and redressibility. The court also held the matter to be ripe as such an inquiry is inextricably related to standing. The court noted the relaxation of the standing and ripeness criteria when addressing First Amendment cases.

27 Criminal acts = lost licenses Illinois HB1271 effective August 20, 2011: the Department of Financial and Professional Regulation must permanently revoke licenses of healthcare professionals convicted of sex crimes, forcible felonies, or misdemeanor battery of a patient No person with such conviction may receive a new license If such charges are filed in future, State s Attorney must notify Dept. of charges, then Sec. must issue admin. order that licensee may only treat patients with licensed chaperone present Chaperone must inform patients Order and/or revocation may be vacated and removed from records in the event of dropped charges, dismissal, etc.

28 Pre-approval for licensure 2010: Texas Board of Optometry promulgated new rule whereby a person may request that it issue a criminal history evaluation letter regarding his or her eligibility for licensure. Only a person enrolled or planning to enroll in optometry and has reason to believe of ineligibility may apply. Must explain basis for request. Include court documents, if any. 22 TX ADC 271.7

29 Past Activities Bhalerao v. Department of Financial and Professional Regulation Write-up: The United States District Court dismissed with prejudice, physician s claims that new Illinois law that permanently revokes the licenses without a hearing of health care workers under certain circumstances (delineated crimes, sex offenders) was a violation of due process, double jeopardy, ex post facto and contracts clause of U.S. Constitution. A licensed physician whose criminal conviction occurred 11 years prior to the enactment of the law received notice of the intent to permanently revoke such license and challenged the law in federal court. In rejecting his arguments, the court noted the relevance of the effective date of the new statute, not the effective date of the criminal conviction and the intent of the legislature to revoke the licenses of persons subject to convictions prior to the date of the statute. The court found the new law to be rationally related to public protection, was not subjecting licensees to double jeopardy, and sanctions are not intended to be punishment, thus not subject to ex post facto analyses.

30 Past Activities Consilglio v. Department of Financial and Professional Regulation Write-up: Illinois Court of Appeals affirmed lower court and upheld the dismissal of consolidated litigation filed by numerous physicians seeking a declaratory judgment that new Illinois statute mandating the revocation of physician licenses without a hearing for certain delineated crimes, regardless of the date of conviction, could only be applied prospectively and not retroactively. The Plaintiffs also sought injunctive relief prohibiting the revocation of their licenses. The Healthcare Worker Self Referral Act, effective August 2011, calls for the automatic permanent revocation of healthcare workers licenses if such licensees have ever been subject to certain criminal convictions that require registration on the sex offender list, that involve battery of a patient in the course of treatment, or that involve forcible felony. In consolidating the appeals, the court summarized the combined arguments of the Licensees as violating substantive and procedural due process, violating double jeopardy, violating ex post facto prohibitions, offensive of the separation of powers, impairing the obligations of contracts between the Department and licensees in violation of contracts clause of the Illinois Constitution, as imposing excessive penalties, precluded by res judicata, and deprives the Licensees of vested limitations and repose defenses. First the court concluded that the Act was intended to apply to convictions that occurred prior to its enactment. The court rejected due processes arguments as to both substantive and procedural issues finding that revocation by operation of law and with no hearing was sustainable. Next the court rejected double jeopardy arguments finding that the Act was not punitive under the applicable 7 factors. Finally, the court rejected the remaining arguments of the Licensees in affirming the dismissal of the case.

31 Past Activities Horrigan v. Department of Financial and Professional Regulation Write-up: The Appellate Court of Illinois affirmed the circuit court and held that the statute mandating that a healthcare professional s license automatically be permanently revoked if the professional was ever convicted of certain crimes was constitutional. The statute applies to crimes that a) require the individual to be registered as a sex offender; b) constitute criminal battery against a patient in the course of treatment; or c) constitute a forcible felony. A pharmacist filed suit after his license was revoked based upon a 25 year old conviction and after he had entered into a 2008 consent order with the Dept. whereby the Dept. agreed to grant him a license after he met all necessary criteria. The pharmacist argued that the law is unconstitutional as it is retroactive, violated the obligations of the parties contract, and is contrary to due process. The court essentially relied on its prior rulings that the act is not retroactive in nature, nor is it punitive, without engaging in extensive analysis.

32 Past Activities Right to a Hearing Jamerson v. Department of Children and Families Write-up: The Supreme Court of Wisconsin affirmed the appellate court and held that a child care giver had a right to a hearing when the Department permanently revoked her license under a new law. The law requires permanent revocation when a child care giver has been convicted of specific predicate crimes. The plaintiff was convicted 20 years earlier of an offense related to food stamps and the bulk of the Court s opinion discussed whether such offense involved fraud so as to satisfy an element of the predicate offense law. Regardless, and while the Court accorded due deference to the Department, the plaintiff was entitled to a hearing as in a contested case, which the Department had denied. The case was remanded to the Department for a hearing to determine whether or not the 20 year-old offense involved fraudulent activity.

33 Permanent Revocation Richmond v. Ohio Board of Nursing Write-up: The Court of Appeals in Ohio affirmed the Court of Common Pleas and held that the Board could permanently revoke a nurse s license after she violated the terms of a prior consent order with the Board. The consent order mandated that, while the license was indefinitely suspended, she must refrain from alcohol and drug use and that she submit periodic urine samples. She failed to provide urine samples on numerous occasions and tested positive for cocaine. The nurse signed for certified mail delivery of the Board s notice that it intended to revoke her license, but she did not request a hearing on the matter. She did not appear at hearing and the Board revoked the license. On appeal, the nurse claimed that the notice served on her was insufficient in that it incorrectly referred to her license as an RN as opposed to an LPN. The court held that there was no due process violation because the notice was reasonable calculated to apprise the nurse of the board s proposed action, particularly because the prior consent order was attached and references thereto were included in the notice.

34 DUI..Relationship to License Duck v. Board of Registered Nursing, Department of Consumer Affairs Write-up: Court of Appeals of California affirmed the lower court that had upheld a three (3) year probation sanction of a nurse requiring supervised practice and a prohibition from him acting as a supervisor, along with completion of a college course and reimbursement of administrative costs. Discipline was based upon a DUI conviction (guilty plea) based upon erratic driving and a blood alcohol content of.20. Practice act provides for discipline based upon criminal conviction if crime substantially related to qualifications, functions, or duties of profession for which license is issued. Court noted that the issue is one of law not fact and agreed with ALJ determination that a DUI is substantially related to the qualifications, functions, or duties of a registered nurse and also citing a previous opinion that convictions involving alcohol consumption reflect a lack of sound professional and personal judgment that is relevant to a physician s fitness and competence to practice medicine. The court rejected the nurse s arguments that merely one DUI does not reflect such a lack of judgment as well as his arguments to overturn the previous judicial decisions. The court also rejected equal protection, abuse of discretion, and excessive penalty arguments of the licensee.

35 Gross Immorality Vague? Denuit v. Ohio State Board of Pharmacy Write-up: Court of Appeals of Ohio affirmed in part and reversed in part lower court regarding pharmacist found to have fondled a co-worker while on duty at the pharmacy. The case has a significant history of appeals and remands whereby the lower court reversed a board finding that fondling a coworker constituted gross immorality based upon the vague term and lack of definition in law. The court of appeals eventually found that gross immorality was not vague and subject to a dictionary definition that includes conduct that goes flagrantly beyond accepted standards of what is right or just and is unmitigated in any way and reversed the lower court and reinstated an indefinite suspension of licensure and imposition of a $500 fine. The court did remand the matter for the board to consider issues related to reinstatement of licensure as argued by the licensee.

36 Moral Turpitude Maga v. Ohio State Medical Board Write-up: Ohio Court of Appeals affirmed lower court and upheld medical board order indefinitely suspending the physician s license based upon criminal conviction in federal court of not filing tax returns for 5 consecutive years and that such constituted moral turpitude. Court rejected arguments of licensee that the board failed to examine additional facts and circumstances establishing moral turpitude beyond the criminal conviction and that Board failed to conduct an independent review; and that finding was not in accordance with law; and that the statute is void for vagueness.

37 Federal Law Aliens who are not qualified aliens or nonimmigrants ineligible for State and local public benefits (a) In general. Notwithstanding any other provision of law and except as provided in subsections (b) and (d), an alien who is not (1) a qualified alien (as defined in section 431 [8 USCS 1641]), (2) a nonimmigrant under the Immigration and Nationality Act, or (3) an alien who is paroled into the United States under section 212(d)(5) of such Act [8 USCS 1182(d)(5)] for less than one year, Is not eligible for any State or local public benefit (as defined in subsection (c)). (c) State or local public benefit defined. (A) any grant, contract, loan, professional license, or commercial license provided by an agency of a State or local government or by appropriated funds of a State or local government; 8 USCS 1621

38 Citizenship Kirk v. New York State Department of Education Write up: United States District Court granted plaintiff motion for summary judgment ruling that NY law requiring applicants for licensure as veterinarians to be either US citizens or aliens lawfully admitted for permanent residence violated Equal Protection (14 th Amendment) and Supremacy Clauses of the US Constitution. Applicant on TN Visa (under NAFTA) and who received a temporary waiver of citizenship by establishing a shortage of veterinarians was granted a limited license by NY board (set to expire in July 2008). Vet had practiced under limited license for 4 years.

39 Citizenship Attorneys fees Kirk v. New York State Department of Education Write up: 2 nd Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed District Court findings that veterinarian (who prevailed in his lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the NY law regarding citizenship status of applicants for licensure) was entitled to attorney s fees as a prevailing party under federal law. Court rejected arguments by Board/ Department of Education that because the appeal of the summary judgment was dismissed as moot because the veterinarian received his permanent resident alien status, he lost his status as a prevailing party. Previous case found NY law requiring U.S. citizenship or permanent resident alien status as a prerequisite to licensure to be unconstitutional under equal protection grounds. (veterinarian, prevailing party, attorney s fees, moot appeal)

40 Citizenship Van Staden v. St. Martin in his official capacity as Chairman of the Louisiana State Board of Practical Nurse Examiners Write up: 5 th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed District Court and upheld summary judgment ruling in favor of board of nursing regarding Louisiana law requirement that applicants for licensure as a nurse be either a U.S. citizen or a permanent resident alien. Court rejected applicant for licensure arguments that law violated equal protection principles. Court held, under a rational basis test, that the law met the constitutional requirements and distinguished between the transient nature of nonimmigrant aliens and permanent resident aliens. Applicant was duly licensed as a nurse in Texas and sought licensure in Louisiana as an LPN. (nurse, citizenship/permanent resident alien, rational basis, equal protection)

41 Video time Local news coverage of Sergio Garcia case: francisco&id= CA Supreme Court Oral Arguments:

42 Thank you. Questions, comments??