Congress enacted the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (“CARES Act”) to “provide emergency assistance and health care response for individuals, families, and businesses affected by the 2020 coronavirus pandemic.” The CARES Act has very broad eligibility standards, and a federal court has interpreted those standards to include prisoners. The IRS has accordingly issued checks to all prisoners who meet the act’s general eligibility requirements.
According to guidance issued by Ohio’s chief legal officer, Attorney General David Yost, Ohioans’ checks are fully exempt from attachment by creditors except for child support obligations. Specifically, Attorney General Yost determined that these payments fall under Ohio R.C. 2329.66(A)(12)(d), a state law that exempts from garnishment any “payment in compensation for loss of future earnings of the person or an individual of whom the person is or was a dependent, to the extent reasonably necessary for the support of the debtor and any of the debtor’s dependents.” There is no cap on this exemption; rather, the full amount of the payment is exempt.
The Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction (“ODRC”), however, has instructed its prison wardens to intercept the CARES Act checks mailed to prisoners so that it can garnish them. Contrary to the Attorney General’s guidance, ODRC classifies these checks as subject to Ohio R.C. 2329.66(A)(3) rather than (A)(12)(d). That provision would subject the any amount of the payment over $500 to garnishment. Every check is in the amount of $1200, so this would leave $700 exposed to garnishment. ODRC intends to garnish the checks of prisoners who owe court debts.
The garnishment of prisoners’ relief checks for debts other than child support, when all other Ohioans’ relief checks are treated are fully immune to non-child support garnishments, violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Ohio Constitution.
On April 12, 2021 we filed a Complaint and a Motion for Preliminary Injunction (PI) in the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas on behalf of two men incarcerated at Ohio prisons whose CARES Act checks were intercepted and garnished by ODRC to pay court fees. On May 7, Defendants (ODRC, ODRC Director Annette Chambers-Smith, and the wardens of the facilities where Plaintiffs are incarcerated) filed their opposition to the PI Motion along with a Motion to Dismiss and a Motion to Stay Discovery until the Court rules on the dismissal motion. We opposed the stay motion and motion to dismiss, and filed our reply in support of the PI on May 21. Defendants filed a reply in support of their motion to dismiss on May 28. The Court granted the Motion to Stay Discovery on May 25. On June 30, the Court granted the Motion to Dismiss. The deadline to appeal is at the end of July