Ohio should abandon appeal of pandemic unemployment assistance lawsuit: Sean Patrick Brennan

In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, millions of Ohioans faced unprecedented financial hardship. The federal Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA) program became a crucial lifeline, offering relief to workers who did not traditionally qualify for unemployment benefits, including gig workers, self-employed individuals, and part-time employees. However, the state’s decision to prematurely end these benefits in 2021 sparked a legal battle that continues, with Gov. Mike DeWine and Attorney General Dave Yost pursuing an appeal against a lawsuit seeking to reinstate the payments.

 
The heart of the lawsuit is simple: Was it lawful and just for Ohio to cut off federal unemployment benefits to about 300,000 Ohioans before their scheduled end? The courts have ruled that the state had an obligation to maximize economic aid for its citizens under Ohio law. Yet, instead of accepting this judgment and recognizing the profound struggles many Ohioans faced, DeWine and Yost recently chose to appeal, prolonging uncertainty and disregarding the economic realities confronting thousands.

 
By continuing this appeal, the state sends a message that politics outweighs the basic needs of its people, even during a crisis. While some argue that the early termination of PUA was meant to encourage workers to rejoin the labor force, the data paint a more nuanced picture. Numerous studies have revealed that ending pandemic unemployment benefits early had minimal impact on job growth but significant negative effects on household financial stability.

 
Ohioans did not stop working because they were receiving benefits; many were sidelined by health concerns, child care shortages, or a lack of available jobs that matched their skills. Cutting off aid did not solve these issues, it exacerbated them.

 
While DeWine and Yost argue their actions were lawful, the broader question is whether they were just. Government officials have both a legal duty and a moral responsibility to safeguard the welfare of their constituents. In this case, the appeal feels less like a defense of legal principles and more like an effort to double down on a decision that harmed thousands of Ohio families.

 
 
By abandoning the appeal, DeWine and Yost would not only uphold the spirit of Ohio law, which emphasizes promoting the well-being of its citizens, but also demonstrate a willingness to prioritize people over politics. In fact, it would pump $900 million into our local communities, supporting local businesses that make up the backbone of our local economies.

 
 
Ohio, like many states, is still recovering from the economic aftershocks of the pandemic. Small businesses, working families, and vulnerable communities continue to feel the ripple effects. Instead of spending taxpayer dollars on a prolonged legal battle, the state’s leaders should redirect resources toward initiatives that promote recovery, job training programs, small business grants, and support for industries still struggling to regain footing.