Gov. JB Pritzker signed House Bill 862 into law June 17, creating the Illinois Department of Disability Advocacy and Guardianship (IDAG).
According to a release:
Through its three primary divisions, the department will continue to
provide critical support to thousands of individuals with disabilities
across Illinois. The Division of State Guardian will serve as guardian
of last resort for nearly 5,000 adults with disabilities.
The Division of Legal Advocacy will continue to provide legal counsel
to thousands of Illinoisians each year in cases of involuntary
treatment and related court proceedings, and the Division of Disability
Rights and Protections will continue to investigate disability rights
violations impacting thousands of Illinois Citizens with Disabilities. A
newly-established Advisory Council consisting of leaders from across
Illinois will provide valuable ongoing input into the department’s work.
“By establishing the Department of Disability Advocacy and
Guardianship, we are making it crystal clear that disability rights are a
priority in Illinois,” Pritzker said. “I am proud to establish this
agency, and I will continue to fight hard to empower people with
disabilities and their families all across our state.”
The new department will begin operations on July 1, 2027.
EL PASO, Texas (KTSM)
— New Mexico Adult Protective Services has received approximately
18,000 allegations of elder abuse, neglect and exploitation so far in
2026, state officials said.
This comes as the state marks Elder Abuse Awareness Month and state
officials are pushing to help New Mexicans recognize the warning signs
and to report suspected abuse.
Elder abuse can take many forms, including physical and emotional
abuse, neglect, abandonment, financial exploitation and scams, according
to the New Mexico Aging Department.
This includes scams that often target older adults, including
fraudulent phone calls, impersonation schemes, and romance scams, New
Mexico state officials said.
These situations are often underreported, leaving many older adults isolated or without the support they need.
“As New Mexico’s older population continues to grow, it is more
important than ever that we look out for one another and recognize when
someone may need help,” said Emily Kaltenbach, Aging Department
secretary. “By learning the signs and speaking up when something feels
wrong, we can help protect those who may be vulnerable.”
According to the National Council on Aging, approximately one in 10
Americans age 60 and older may have experienced some form of elder
abuse. Social isolation, cognitive decline, physical disabilities, and
limited access to services can all make someone more susceptible to
experiencing abuse.
Warning signs of abuse, neglect or exploitation may include:
Unexplained injuries, such as cuts, scratches, bruises, broken bones or bedsores
Sudden changes in behavior
Withdrawal from social activities or communication
Poor hygiene, malnutrition, or unsafe living conditions
Sudden financial changes or unusual banking activity
Fearfulness around caregivers or family members
Lack of access to medication, medical care or basic needs
“Preventing elder abuse starts with awareness and connection,” said Corey Roybal, Adult
Protective Services director. “Checking on a neighbor, noticing unusual
behavior, or asking questions when something doesn’t seem right can
make a meaningful difference in someone’s well-being.”
New Mexicans who suspect abuse, neglect or exploitation of a
vulnerable adult are encouraged to report concerns to Adult Protective
Services. Reports can be made 24 hours a day through the statewide
intake line at (866) 654-3219.
To learn more about elder abuse prevention and available resources, visit
the New Mexico Aging and Long-Term Services Department website at aging.nm.gov.
Earlier this month, Karilyn’s Law — a
bill that would reform the guardianship system — unanimously passed
both chambers of the New York State Legislature and now awaits action by
Governor Kathy Hochul.
When
longtime guardianship advocate Christine Montanti, who is a frequent
visitor to the East End, called her mother to tell her the good news,
the elder had one question.
“Does that mean I’m free?” she asked her daughter.
“It was so heartbreaking. I don’t want to cry myself,” Montanti recalled, her voice breaking. “I'm still fighting.”
Montanti’s
82-year-old mother, Karilyn, is the name and story behind the bill. It
begins in 2018, Montanti said, when her mother — who resides in an
assisted living facility in Florida, where the bill is also attempting
to be passed — began complaining about excessive control.
When
Montanti tried to intervene, she was blocked by the power of attorney,
which is held by a family member, she said. As the isolation has
progressed, Karilyn Montanti was denied use of her phone and computer,
visitation with her family members, and even access to medical care, her
daughter said.
Family
photographs were removed from her room, Montanti said. She wasn’t
allowed to receive letters or packages, she said, and she was all alone.
“It’s
been over eight years of litigating,” she said. “I can’t even tell you,
the legal bills are outrageous. Many people go broke trying to litigate
for their loved one, and they end up having to give up because they
can’t hang in there.”
Karilyn’s
Law is the first guardianship reform measure of its kind to be passed
by a state legislature in the United States. Montanti said she hopes
that this landmark legislation will inspire sweeping reforms nationwide
aimed at protecting the rights of vulnerable individuals and their
families — and stop the isolation of vulnerable individuals.
“It’s
a cruel and unusual punishment without presenting clear and convincing
evidence of wrongdoing,” she said, “and you just feel like you're
suffocating, like you cannot believe this is even happening.”
As
she has advocated for her mother, Montanti learned that guardianship
abuse is a national epidemic that ransacks the wealth and autonomy of
vulnerable senior citizens.
The
Elder Justice Roadmap, a research initiative funded by the U.S.
Department of Justice, reported that 10 percent of adults over age 60
experience some form of abuse each year. Studies have also shown that
about two-thirds of elder abuse victims are women.
But the extent of guardianship abuse is unknown, due to a lack of data.
“Hopefully,
this bill and my mother’s story will stop that exploitation and neglect
and abuse, because you have to watch your loved one going through all
this and they’re pleading for help,” Montanti said. “To date, my mother
is still suffering, so while I’m so grateful that this happened, it’s
still not over in my mother’s case.”
Under
the legislation — which was authored by State Senator Anthony Palumbo
and co-sponsored by State Senator Cordell Cleare and State Assemblyman
Tommy John Schiavoni — a guardian, care manager or power of attorney is
prohibited from arbitrarily terminating visitation rights and isolating
vulnerable individuals who are being held in involuntary guardianship.
The bill provides for family members to make an application for visitation and have an evidentiary hearing within 10 days.
“Karilyn’s
Law makes a simple but important change to the state’s guardianship
laws to provide family members and friends with an opportunity to visit
loved ones who are under guardianship,” Palumbo said. “The legislation
will close a loophole that has allowed guardians with extreme power to
arbitrarily deny individuals access to their loved ones over personal
differences and family disputes.”
For now, it’s a waiting game as Hochul considers the bill, Montani said, which could change the guardianship system forever.
“It’s
a huge, huge win,” she said. “Hopefully, it’s going to restore access
to all these New York State residents who have been arbitrarily blocked
without any evidence of wrongdoing whatsoever and get them access — and
get those vulnerable individuals out of this isolation that they’re in.
So this is a huge win.”
Suspended Jefferson
County Probate Judge Yashiba Blanchard denies all allegations in a
120-page complaint against her that was sent to a state judicial
disciplinary court.
"Judge
Blanchard asserts all legal and equitable defenses as to the
allegations in these charges," lawyers wrote in the June 13 filing.
The
filing is the judge's first public declaration since her suspension.
Blanchard is represented by lawyers Emory Anthony Jr., Luckie Milad and
Moses Stone.
Under
the Alabama law, a judge is automatically suspended when the Judicial
Inquiry Commission brings a case to the Court of the Judiciary. The
Court of the Judiciary has authority to clear judges of wrongdoing,
suspend without pay, censure them or remove them from office.
Among the allegations, the complaint
claims that Blanchard's erratic schedule caused unnecessary delays in
multiple legal proceedings, including hearings for probate cases and
involuntary commitments.
According
to the complaint, Blanchard was responsible for some mental health
patients having unnecessary extended hospital stays or being denied
needed care.
The
probate court is also responsible for millions of dollars from estates
that are managed by lawyers appointed by the judge. The complaint
alleges that Blanchard improperly removed conservator cases from one
firm and gave them to another.
The
Judicial Inquiry Commission's complaint accuses Blanchard of acting in
bad faith by removing attorneys from the law firm of Hand Arendall
serving as conservators in probate cases without following procedures or
providing legal justification.
She is also accused of using her authority to settle personal disagreements rather than taking reasonable judicial action.
The
detailed report, which includes input from multiple participants,
alleges "a pattern and practice of bullying and retaliation against
probate court staff" that they say began on Blanchard's first day.
In one alleged
incident, Blanchard is accused of holding a meeting with employees on
Jan. 5, 2026, where she threatened them with suspension or firing if
they complained against her.
"Judge
Blanchard told employees that if anyone tried to report her to HR, they
had first better make sure that they themselves are 'clean,'" according
to the complaint. "At that meeting, Judge Blanchard declared that she
was the 'ultimate authority,' and that she had no boss. She told the
staff that whatever she says goes."
While
Blanchard and her lawyers have declined to comment, the judge's
supporters on social media and on talk radio have dismissed allegations
against her as retaliation because Blanchard changed the traditional
operations of her court by using different lawyers.
A pretrial hearing is scheduled July 9 in Montgomery.
The steps and strategy needed in preparing for a guardianship hearing
were the focus of a recent New York State Bar Association continuing
legal education course sponsored by its Elder Law and Special Needs
section.
“Preparing for a Guardianship Hearing” is the third in a four-part
series detailing key steps involved in preparing for a bench trial for
the appointment of a guardian under Article 81. During the hour-long
seminar, long time elder law and guardianship attorney Emily Ann Klotz
provided tips on handling discovery, outlined steps in preparing a
notice to admit and detailed common motions used in guardianship cases.
While it may seem obvious, Klotz says careful preparation of
witnesses and the potential guardian is essential. Gather witnesses who
will either support or contest the substance of the guardianship
petition including friends, family, social workers, geriatricians and
medical professionals. Investigate witnesses for any conflicts of
interest and be aware of the relationship between the witness and the
adult who is incapacitated.
Klotz encourages attorneys to conduct a background investigation into
the proposed guardian to make sure they meet the qualifications. Does
the guardian have the financial means and education needed to care for
this person? Klotz related a story of a case in which the potential
guardian was found to be a felon and could not be bonded.
“No one ever asked her if she was a felon. It was a mess. Check with
your bonding company, check credit ratings, bankruptcies and make sure
the guardian candidate understands the role and responsibilities of the
job,” she warned.
Alert the court to any accommodation needed by a witness such as an
interpreter, a hearing device or a video text display. Klotz reminds
attorneys that it may take time for the court to secure the needed
resources. She also advises attorneys to ask the court to keep witnesses
out of the courtroom.
“If it’s an in-person trial, you have to remember to have the court
exclude the witnesses from the courtroom before they testify because you
don’t want one witness influencing the other witnesses,” Klotz said.
During the Hearing: Standards, Evidence and Experts
The standard of proof in guardianship hearings is “clear and
convincing evidence,” which Klotz admits is a high standard. Attorneys
must present evidence that supports the allegation that an incapacitated
person cannot manage daily tasks, which include bathing, shopping and
making their own medical decision. One must prove that the person will
suffer harm without a guardian’s assistance in maintaining a home.
Finally, one must prove that the person cannot understand their
limitations.
“Lack of understanding here is key, the court requires proof that no
less restrictive form of assistance is available,” explains Klotz. “If
you want full guardianship, you have to show why this is needed and have
those arguments ready before you go to trial.”
If an expert witness is being presented, Klotz says they will need
extra preparation because they will be examined by attorneys from the
other side. Outline the witnesses’ qualifications, including education,
research and their connection to the case. They should be prepared to
answer how they become involved with the case and be able to detail
interactions with the incapacitated person.
“The other side is entitled to question the expert witness and once
the expert survives the voir dire, you can state the witness opinions on
the matter,” Klotz said.
The Elder Law and Special Needs Section will hold the fourth and final part of the series on guardianship on July 15.
By: Michelle Cera Andrew Ford Laura Wadsten Editor: Jim Impoco Sam Koppelman
They beat the walls.
Cheryle Weir couldn’t breathe, her roommate recalled. Dependent on
ventilators at an Ensign facility, they couldn’t talk. They couldn’t
scream.
So they banged on the table, banged on the wall, desperate for anyone to hear. A nurse should have been there. No one was.
Eventually, Cheryle stopped banging.
Her family’s lawsuit blames her death on The Ensign Group ($ENSG).
Ensign is America’s largest operator of “skilled nursing facilities”
(SNFs) — facilities designed to rehabilitate people who need less than
hospital care, but more care than they can provide themselves.
Ensign boasts about its star ratings, “industry-leading” clinical
outcomes, and “strong history of quickly improving the quality of care
in the facilities we acquire.” A sell-side analyst referred to Ensign’s
quality star ratings as part of its “secret sauce.” And Ensign says it
sets “the standard by which all others in our industry are measured.”
But a five-month Hunterbrook investigation found that standard is tragically low — and fatal.
The investigation revealed Ensign’s $10 billion empire is built on a
dubious foundation: Its profits are heavily dependent on understaffing
facilities. It performs better than average on self-reported quality
metrics but worse on independently verifiable measures. It regularly
violates state minimum staffing laws, and routes taxpayer dollars to its
executives and to its own affiliates. Meanwhile, Ensign patients suffer
and sometimes die.
“We could’ve had so much more time,” Weir’s daughter, Hanneka White, told Hunterbrook in an interview. “And it was taken away.”
One of Cheryle Weir’s daughters, Hanneka White, with a photo of her mother. Source: Hunterbrook Media
Hunterbrook Media’s reporting team — led by three journalists, as
well as former financial analysts from Goldman Sachs and Magnetar
Capital — examined millions of Center for Medicare & Medicaid
Services (CMS) datapoints, reviewed thousands of pages of documents, and
interviewed dozens of sources, including: attorneys, professors,
healthcare professionals, ombudsmen, data analysts, and public
advocates, as well as former employees of Ensign, residents of Ensign
facilities, and family members of Ensign residents.
Here’s the story:
Ensign’s profits can be traced to providing less
care than its patients need — and less care than it is meant to provide
based on the tax dollars it receives from the government.Government programs pay skilled nursing facilities based on “acuity level,” a measurement of how sick the residents are. Ensign says
it’s focusing on high-acuity people in order to increase its revenue,
the bulk of which comes from government programs. But then it staffs
many facilities below the levels needed to provide the care those
payment rates are calibrated to support. Using the formula from a 2025 peer-reviewed study,
Hunterbrook calculated a 5 million-hour gap between hours of nursing
care needed and hours actually provided at Ensign facilities between
July and November 2024, the period for which robust data is available.
“The difference between those two numbers is fraud,” opined Ernest Tosh,
an attorney who litigates nursing home abuse and neglect cases.
Hunterbrook estimates that closing that staffing gap would have cost
Ensign about $161 million during the period studied — or roughly $386
million annualized. That’s more than the company’s entire reported net
income that year of $298 million. Hunterbrook also found that the more a
facility profited from understaffing, the worse its health survey
scores, facility-reported incidents, complaint deficiencies, total
penalties, staff turnover, and staffing ratings.
The Ensign Effect. We found Ensign’s growth
strategy is to buy struggling nursing homes — then cut staff at those
facilities and bank the savings, all while claiming quality improves.
Ensign has rapidly built its $10 billion empire by rolling up distressed
nursing homes, claiming to transform them into “market leaders in
clinical quality.” But after Ensign acquires a facility, we found,
nursing hours fall. Hunterbrook tracked 161 facilities before and after
Ensign acquisition against roughly 15,000 other nursing facilities,
controlling for industry trends. Bottom line: The quality of the
facilities gets worse, not better, after Ensign acquires them.
Federal and state laws prohibit understaffing. Federal law
requires every Medicare- and Medicaid-funded nursing facility to keep
“sufficient nursing staff” to meet each resident’s needs. The sicker the
resident, the more staffing the law generally demands. Yet Hunterbrook
found no consistent relationship between how sick Ensign’s residents are
and how many hours it staffs. Four states where Ensign operates impose
numeric floors on the care that must be provided: California,
Washington, Tennessee, and Kansas. Our analysis of CMS records from 2020
through 2025 found Ensign facilities falling below the legal floors in
those states on more than 18,000 days cumulatively. “You have to staff
to meet the needs of residents, and that consistently does not happen,”
said Ed Dudensing, an elder-abuse attorney, describing insufficient
staffing. “That’s illegal.”
Ensign’s superior “star” ratings are largely built on an honor system the company appears to be gaming. The CEO emphasized Ensign facilities “outperformed industry peers in 5-Star Quality Measure results” in a recent press release.
He also highlighted “the highest quality clinical outcomes” in an
earnings call last year. What he didn’t mention is that those measures
are largely self-reported. We sorted CMS Provider Information
performance metrics into three tiers: independently verified by
unannounced government inspectors; self-reported but auditable via
payroll records; or self-assessed and self-reported with no imposed
documentation procedures. The result: Ensign performs worse when there
is external verification.
Ensign paid more than $339 million to its own affiliates in 2024. That’s about 8% of $ENSG revenue that year. The maneuver is known as tunneling.
Our cost-report analysis shows Ensign facilities pay hundreds of
millions of dollars a year to entities also owned or controlled by
Ensign. Think: Landlords. Insurance. Transportation. “Home office”
management fees. Hunterbrook found that, across the industry, more money
going to related parties correlates with fewer staffing hours, more
staff turnover, and lower health inspection scores, among other metrics.
A 2024 congressional letter
to Ensign’s then-executive chairman identified the industry practice as
a “deceptive tactic” to hide profit. In an interview, Tosh, the
attorney, shared his opinion of nursing homes tunneling money to related
parties without any effective oversight: “It’s just a huge menagerie of
corporations to hide the money movement. In effect it’s money
laundering.”
Former employees in different states described systematic misrepresentations. Fabricated
Google reviews; document falsification; falls downgraded to “slips;”
improperly upcoded patient acuity; and retaliation against staff who
refused to engage in these activities. Former employees also told
Hunterbrook they were compelled to provide unnecessary care and
exaggerate its duration. One former Ensign therapist described
higher-ups encouraging higher billing via falsifying minutes of therapy:
“The 30 would be erased and somebody would put in a 70.”
An industry lobbying group waged a multi-front campaign to kill a federal government rule meant to stop understaffing. In
February of 2026, the Trump Administration rescinded a Biden-era rule
setting a federal staffing minimum for nursing facilities, after the
American Health Care Association (AHCA), an industry group, sued the
government. Ensign and other operators backed a pro-Trump super PAC and Ensign gave $750,000 to MAGA Inc before the rule was rescinded. The now-defunct rule was estimated to save 13,000 lives a year.
Behind all the numbers, patients suffer and die. Thomas
Scates died after an Ensign facility neglected him, according to his
family. Herbert Howenstein died after a large pressure ulcer developed
at an Ensign nursing home. Six inches long, an inch deep, blackened dead
flesh, penetrating to muscle. An EMT report shows that facility staff
were aware but nobody was treating him for it. An expert reviewing his
death concluded, “The patient’s demise was almost merciful.” A nonverbal
resident with Alzheimer’s was found covered in ants with bites all over
her body — an infestation discovered by her family, not the staff,
according to an investigation report. Cheryle Weir died after begging
for help that did not come in time, her daughter told Hunterbrook. These
are just some of the stories Hunterbrook heard, which represent a
fraction of the devastation in Ensign facilities around the country.
Ensign did not respond to multiple detailed requests for comment from Hunterbrook. Ensign CEO Barry Port did, however, tell The Arizona Republic in 2023
that staffing is decided by individual facility management, and the
suggestion that his company siphons money to boost profit is
“categorically false.” Other statements by the company seem to
contradict that supposed distance between Ensign and its individual
facilities. In a recent earnings call, for example, Port cited access to patient-level data and involvement in facility-level decisions. The most recent 10-K
also suggested there was visibility over individual facilities: Ensign
said they use specialized software to help caregivers “more accurately”
capture services to “increase reimbursement,” and that the company had
“installed software and touch-screen interface systems in each
operation.”
If you or a loved one has been affected, or if you have any relevant information to share, please reach out at ideas@hntrbrk.com. This is part one of a series on Ensign and the industry.
“They’re The Model”
Most of us will require institutional care in our lifetime. We hope that care will be high quality.
Faced with an aging population and widespread nursing shortages,
every American nursing facility must contend with infections, falls, and
sometimes death. On an average day, a facility might smell like human
waste cut with cleaning products. Easy listening music covers the
croaking sounds of uncomfortable residents. Frontline staff do their
best at difficult and low-paying jobs, in facilities lit fluorescently
and decorated in liminal beige.
But Ensign has established something worse: a business model that
seems to depend on eroding care for America’s sick and elderly.
“To take away resources from that is, I don’t even think that’s bad management. I think that’s just evil greed.”
Robert love, Former cook at Tennessee Nursing Facility Acquired by Ensign
Our investigation shows the company boomed in recent years by rolling
up distressed homes, cutting high-skilled nursing staff, and gaming
metrics.
“They’re the model,” said David Kingsley, a retired professor at the
Kansas University Medical Center who researches corporations that depend
on revenue from Medicare and Medicaid.
Ensign operates the most CMS-certified nursing facilities in America, with 334 locations across 17 states. They offer more than 38,000 skilled nursing beds, according to a March filing.
But these facilities have problems — and they seem to get worse after
Ensign takes over. Conditions at several of its facilities are so
severe that they are candidates on CMS’s “Special Focus Facility” list,
a roundup of facilities with a pattern of serious problems that pose
risks to resident health and safety. Facilities on the SFF list are at
risk of being terminated from Medicare or Medicaid programs.
And Ensign is coming for more. In the second quarter so far, it has announced purchases of 17 facilities in Texas, two in Wisconsin, and one each in Iowa and California (real estate only).
Ensign’s model is working. It grew rapidly after its current CEO took
the helm in 2019. His $13.8 million in compensation last year — at a
company whose revenue is largely derived from public funds — was mostly
tied to company performance.
And Ensign does not limit incentive-based compensation to its senior
executives. Our investigation found that some individual facility
administrators are compensated the same way, creating powerful
incentives to cut costs. While it’s normal to have financial performance
incentives for cutting costs, it’s different when the incentive is to
cut nursing hours — the results can be a matter of life and death.
For example, a lawsuit deposition
shows the company tied a facility administrator’s bonus directly to
location profits, and by staffing below recommended levels, that
administrator was able to boost a roughly $400,000 annual bonus to more
than $800,000.
As a result of understaffing at that very same facility, the lawsuit
claims, a resident died, his final moments captured on a recorded phone
call provided to Hunterbrook:
One source, a forensic accountant, likened the industry to the Sackler family’s opioid profiteering.
A Huron County man charged with elder abuse in March now faces up to life in prison after prosecutors added a second-degree murder charge in connection with his mother's death.
Rebecca Wu, 53, was arrested last week along with er sister, Ingrid Wu, 52, for allegedly failing to properly care for their parents at a University City apartment. Rebecca pled not guilty on Tuesday. Ingrid entered the same plea on Monday. NBC 7's Allison Ash has the latest details on the case from the downtown courthouse.
A for-profit veteran benefits claim consultant told Kansas lawmakers the company’s operations were legal. A federal judge disagreed.
By: Grace Hills
OVERLAND PARK — A federal judge in
North Carolina found that Veterans Guardian, a for-profit consultant
that charges veterans for help filing their disability claims, violates
federal law.
The order came just a few months
after the company lobbied Kansas legislators to pass a bill that would
have greenlit for-profit consultants, despite concerns that the practice
may be unlawful. The bill almost became law but support for it crumbled apart in the final hours of the legislative session.
Proponents argued Feb. 3 before the
House Veterans and Military Committee that a few “bad actors” ruined the
for-profit consultants’ reputations by charging exorbitant fees and
using suspicious marketing tactics. Bill Taylor, co-founder of Veterans
Guardian, said House Bill 2214 would have reined those companies in.
“We are 100% in compliance with federal law,” Taylor testified to lawmakers in February.
In May, U.S. District Judge Catherine Eagles disagreed.
Federal law
states “no individual may act as an agent or attorney in the
preparation, presentation, or prosecution of any claim,” unless they are
accredited — which Veterans Guardian and the other for-profit
consultants are not. Veterans who want help reviewing a claim can get
help from an attorney or claims agent in exchange for a fee, which could
include a portion of the veteran’s benefits.
Opponents have called the for-profit
consultants “claim sharks,” and argue that charging veterans thousands —
even tens of thousands — for a service that is offered for free by
accredited services is predatory.
Eagles’ order outlined how the Pinehurst, North Carolina-based Veterans Guardian charged the three plaintiffs between $1,880 and $21,360. The $21,360 fee was for an initial disability claim.
“The evidence is undisputed that
(Veterans) Guardian is not accredited, that on behalf of veterans it
prepares claims forms, that in those forms it presents disability claims
for decision by the (Veterans Affairs), and that it charges fees for
doing so,” Eagles wrote in her order. “These actions violate federal
law.”
Veterans Guardian was founded in
2017. The federal law Eagles cited has existed since long before then.
Veterans Guardian, and similar for-profit consultants, have operated
through a legal loophole.
An NPR investigation
found that in 2006, as the U.S. was at war with Iraq, Congress thought
veterans needed more options to navigate the disability claims process.
For-profit consultants repeat that rationale today — that veterans
deserve a choice between their paid, streamlined services or free but
more complex accredited ones.
That year, Congress stripped the
criminal penalties for violating the law — but kept the law on the
books. That meant companies like Veterans Guardian have been able to use
that loophole to continue operating without consequences.
Multiple bills have been introduced to reinstate the criminal penalties, but none has passed. Veterans Guardian has spent millions lobbying on the federal level. A federal bill similar to the Kansas one — that would allow for-profit consultants to legally charge veterans — advanced in the U.S. House.
After Eagles’ order, more congressional attempts at criminalization were introduced in the U.S. House and Senate. U.S. Rep. Sharice Davids, D-Kansas, signed onto the legislation Monday, a spokesperson said.
A spokesperson for Republican U.S.
Sen. Jerry Moran, who chairs the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee,
didn’t provide a comment in time for this story.
Anthony Pierce, counsel to Veterans Guardian, said the company “strenuously disagrees” with the court’s ruling.
“The ruling is not final, and
Veterans Guardian will vigorously pursue all available avenues of appeal
to defend our work on behalf of disabled veterans,” Pierce said.
