Rewritten Opinion, Smith v. Rasmussen

FEMINIST JUDGMENTS: REWRITTEN HEALTH LAW OPINIONS (Seema Mohapatra and Lindsay F. Wiley, eds. (Cambridge Univ. Press, expected publication 2021)

U of Colorado Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 20-25

15 Pages Posted: 22 May 2020 Last revised: 28 May 2020

See all articles by Craig Konnoth

Craig Konnoth

University of Colorado School of Law

Date Written: May 20, 2020

Abstract

This chapter “rewrites” Smith v. Rasmussen, 249 F.3d 755 (8th Cir. 2001), which affirmed Iowa’s Medicaid agency’s refusal to cover gender affirmation surgery for a beneficiary. The rewritten opinion “conclude[s] that the exclusion regulation discriminates based on sex, thereby failing to satisfy the Medicaid statute’s reasonableness requirements.”

Keywords: Transgender, gender reassignment, Medicaid

Suggested Citation

Konnoth, Craig, Rewritten Opinion, Smith v. Rasmussen (May 20, 2020). FEMINIST JUDGMENTS: REWRITTEN HEALTH LAW OPINIONS (Seema Mohapatra and Lindsay F. Wiley, eds. (Cambridge Univ. Press, expected publication 2021), U of Colorado Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 20-25, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3606707

Craig Konnoth (Contact Author)

University of Colorado School of Law ( email )

401 UCB
Boulder, CO 80309
United States

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
14
Abstract Views
135
PlumX Metrics