BY:Â SUSAN TEBBENÂ –Â Ohio Capital Journal
Getty Images
A think-tank in favor of Gov. Mike DeWineâs decision to end supplemental unemployment assistance despite a continued pandemic impacting the economy is yet again pushing the Ohio Supreme Court to support the decision. The governor himself is also weighing in.
The federal supplemental assistance from The CARES Act expired on Sept. 4, 2021 though DeWine ended it in Ohio on June 26, 2021.
In a court filing this week by attorney (and former state Senate president) Larry Obhof, the Buckeye Institute called the early ending of additional Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation (FPUC) âsound economic policy.â
The group argued in their second push for the court to land on the side of DeWine that âneither state nor federal law compels Ohio to continue participatingâ in the unemployment program.
âFederal law clearly indicates that states are free to participate and, if they so choose, to withdraw from the program as well,â the institute wrote in the Jan. 10 court filing.
Ohio residents Candy Bowling, Shawnee Huff and David Willis sued the DeWine administration in September to get the additional $300 monthly unemployment benefits reinstated, which they say are needed to help with household expenses such as rent, food and medical expenses since they were laid off due to the pandemic, according to their lawsuit.
Whatâs still up to the court to decide is whether the governor, not the state as a whole, was required to continue participating in the program. Obhof says in court documents that he is not.
âBecause the Governor acted lawfully, the courts may not substitute their judgment for his policy decision,â he wrote.
The group argues, as DeWine did when he decided to cut the benefits, that the additional payments were âdelaying employeesâ return to work,â and ending the support brought more employees back, though businesses across the nation are still struggling to get back to full staffing.
âThe Governorâs decision to end the additional FPUC payments was not a magic talisman for Ohioâs economy, but it was sound economic policy,â the institute wrote.
DeWine filed his own brief arguing a lower courtâs ruling saying the governor shouldnât have ended the assistance ârests on a misreading of a state lawâ requiring the director of the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services to adopt rules and regulations necessary to âsecure to this state and its citizens the advantagesâ of federal statutes, in this case including the CARES Act funds.
âNo state law â âlong-standingâ or otherwise â compelled Ohio to participate in the program here at issue,â DeWineâs brief stated. âBecause nothing compelled the governor to participate in the program, the governorâs withdrawal did not contradict any policy mandate from the legislature.â
DeWineâs son, Supreme Court Justice Patrick DeWine, recused himself from this case âto avoid any appearance of impropriety that might result from my fatherâs public involvement in this matter,â according to court documents.
In supporting the governor, the Buckeye Institute interpreted the additional unemployment benefits as a negative for the economy because Goldman Sachs economists cited in their brief estimated the median recipient of the benefits received âroughly 90% of their prior wage,â though it did not specify what the median wage for those beneficiaries was or whether it was enough to support Ohioans in essential ways.
The Buckeye Institute brief joined other Ohio groups who supported governorâs decision. In August of last year, the Ohio Chamber of Commerce, the Ohio Business Roundtable, the Ohio Restaurant Association, the Ohio Hotel and Lodging Association, the Ohio Grocers Association and the Ohio Trucking Association filed their own brief saying the FPUC benefits âwill result in a scenario where many individuals will make more in unemployment than when working,â calling the staffing issues for businesses an âartificially created labor shortage.â
The groups levied their support once again in a Jan. 7 filing, which also included the Ohio Manufacturersâ Association, the Ohio Council of Retail Merchants and the Ohio Farm Bureau Federation.
In this filing, they made a matching argument with the Buckeye Institute that the governor is allowed to âexercise discretion regarding Ohioâs participation in federal programs.â
The state Supreme Court denied two attempts in the case to speed up the process of deciding the case, but has not set other deadlines in the case, including whether or not they will have an oral argument to hear from attorneys on both sides.

Susan Tebben is an award-winning journalist with a decade of experience covering Ohio news, including courts and crime, Appalachian social issues, government, education, diversity and culture. She has worked for The Newark Advocate, The Glasgow Daily Times, The Athens Messenger, and WOUB Public Media. She has also had work featured on National Public Radio.
MORE FROM AUTHOR