Loading
Two parallel Medicaid algorithm cases. K.W. v Armstrong (Idaho, March 2016): federal district court struck down state's in-home support formula for adults with developmental disabilities, finding it relied on unreliable data and violated due process. Arkansas ADHS v Ledgerwood (Arkansas, 2017): state court issued injunction against Arkansas DHS's use of the RUGs algorithm without notice-and-comment rulemaking. Both established that government must disclose algorithmic decision logic and provide meaningful explanations.
These cases are foundational precedents for due process challenges to automated government decisions. Plaintiffs in both cases were people with disabilities whose Medicaid in-home care hours were drastically cut by undisclosed algorithms.
These cases are foundational precedents for due process challenges to automated government decisions. Plaintiffs in both cases were people with disabilities whose Medicaid in-home care hours were drastically cut by undisclosed algorithms.
Two parallel Medicaid algorithm cases. K.W. v Armstrong (Idaho, March 2016): federal district court struck down state's in-home support formula for adults with developmental disabilities, finding it relied on unreliable data and violated due process. Arkansas ADHS v Ledgerwood (Arkansas, 2017): state court issued injunction against Arkansas DHS's use of the RUGs algorithm without notice-and-comment rulemaking. Both established that government must disclose algorithmic decision logic and provide meaningful explanations.
This summary is provided for general information and is not legal advice. Enforcement outcomes can be appealed or revised; verify the current position against the primary sources above.