Nj First Act Exemption: Fill & Download for Free

The govt changed up the FMLA provisions temporarily to allow you to take time off to care for children during COVID, if there is no other childcare available. Below are the rules; an employer isn’t allowed to fire you for anything protected under FMLA rules. But, small businesses of less than 50 employees may be able to get an exemption—-here are some details on that, too.FMLA Rules: What Small Business Employers Should KnowSmall-business exemptions to COVID-19 emergency leave, expanded FMLA clarifiedHere are the things you should be getting if the business has more than 50 employees:Temporary Rule: Paid Leave Under the Families First Coronavirus Response ActIt says that all employers have to provide up to 80 hours of leave for:the employee is caring for his or her son or daughter whose school or place of care is closed or whose child care provider is unavailable for reasons related to COVID-19.It also Provides direction for the effective administration of the Emergency Family and Medical Leave Expansion Act (EFMLEA), which requires that certain employers provide up to 10 weeks of paid, and 2 weeks unpaid, emergency family and medical leave to eligible employees if the employee is caring for his or her son or daughter whose school or place of care is closed or whose child care provider is unavailable for reasons related to COVID-19.

No, not exactly true. Native people could vote in many states earlier that that. However, it is partly true in that in some states Native people were being prevented from voting before the 1970s. In some states Native people continue to be prevented from voting to this day. It has been a very long path for voting rights for Native people in the US. It has much in common with voting rights for other minorities but with its own twists and turns and it is less well known.In 1924, Native Americans got US citizenship in the Indian Citizenship Act. Before that about 1/2 were citizens by other means. After 1924, in theory, all Natives should have been able to vote. But it was not the case for many people. It should be noted that this was also the case for man minorities in many places in the 1920s.It helps to go back over the history. In 1880 John Elk, who was Winnebago tried to registrar to vote in Omaha. He said he was a citizen under the 14th amendment. In Elk v Wilkins the Supreme Cort ruled he was not a citizen. Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94 (1884)In 1890, the United States Census formally enumerated all of the Indians of the country. According to the Census, there were a total of 248,253 Indians in the United States. However because of racism in some places Native people did not report that were Native. In New England many passed as French Canadians, for example.The Indian Naturalization Act of 1890 was passed and finally granted citizenship to some Native Americans by an application process. The Commissioner of Indian Affairs announced that the 8th of February was to be celebrated as Franchise Day. It was on this day that the Dawes Act was signed into law. The Dawes Act provided the legal mechanism for Indians to become citizens of the United States, its primary purpose was to break up communal land holdings on reservations and to give each Indian family a small plot of land to farm.Then, in Matter of Heff, the Supreme Court held in 1905 that Indians became American citizens as soon as they accepted their land allotment as was happening under the Dawes Act. The decision infuriated Congress and the Bureau of Indian Affairs who had insisted that Indians who accepted allotments could not become citizens until the end of their trust period of twenty years.Matter of Heff, 197 U.S. 488 (1905)In 1916 the United States v. Nice, had the Supreme Court take away some rights and said that Native people could be citizens and also treated as minors. United States v. Nice, 241 U.S. 591 (1916)Ethan Anderson (of the Pomo tribe) first attempted to register to vote with the Lake County clerk in 1915, and was denied. He and several members of his met and worked to raise money for two years so that he might take his case to court. A state court ruled in his favor in 1917, for under the Burke Act of 1906 any Native American who had received a patent-in-fee or left a reservation to lead a “civilized life” was granted citizenship and through that the right to vote. The court case (Anderson versus Mathews) gave non-reservation Indians the right to vote. Anderson had attempted to register to vote in Mendocino County and was refused. The court case, which was decided by the California Supreme Court, was funded by the Indian Board of Cooperation. Anderson v. MathewsDuring World War I, Indians were required to register for the draft but were ineligible to be drafted since they were not citizens. Yavapai physician Dr. Carlos Montezuma protested the draft policy and urged the United States to make Indians citizens and then draft them. They enlisted in large numbers. Around 10,000 Indians served in the military in WWI. In 1919, Congress passed an act which provided citizenship for all Indians who served in the military or in naval establishments during World War I.In North Carolina, the Eastern Cherokee tribal council drafted a resolution which argued that the fact that the Eastern Cherokee were denied the right to vote in North Carolina also denied them fair treatment and equal rights by county draft boards. The council asserted that“any organization or group that would deprive a people of as sacred a right as the right of suffrage would not hesitate to deprive them of other constitutional rights including the three inalienable rights – life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, if the opportunity to do so presents itself.”After WWI there was a great deal of pressure to grant citizenship by Native rights groups and allies. The 1924 act was promoted by progressives who were concerned about the constitutional rights of Indians and who wished to free Indians from federal control.Two days after passing the Indian Citizenship Act, Congress passed a bill to allot the Eastern Cherokee in North Carolina. However they neglected to upgrade the language in the bill to account for the Indian Citizenship Act. The bill said that the Eastern Cherokee would become citizens only after receiving and registering their allotments. The NC State Attorney General said that the Eastern Cherokee were not citizens because this bill superseded the Indian Citizenship Act. The Bureau of Indian Affairs said they were citizens. The Cherokee NC were treated as though they were not citizens and were not allowed to register to vote.Charles Curtis was the 31st Vice President of the United States from 1929 to 1933. He was a Native American from the Kaw tribe (and also Osage and Potawatomi). He had been Senator from Kansas from 1907 to 1929 (except for 2 years) and was majority leader. During his time in the Senate, Curtis became an original sponsor of the Equal Rights Amendment. The Republican part had the ERA on its part platform plank from 1940 until 1980. Before that he had been in the House from 1893 to 1907.Here is VP Curtis campaigning on the in Montana with Crow tribal members in 1928. In the Depression he pushed Hoover to create a 5 da work week to help with jobs.In Congress passed another act in 1928 which specifically granted citizenship to the North Carolina Cherokee. Two years later Eastern Cherokee leader Henry M. Owl was denied the right to register to vote in 1930. The state of NC said he was not a citizen. So, Congress passed another act once again reaffirming citizenship for the Eastern Cherokee. The Southern states said is was interfering with “States Rights”. The same lies they used to stop African American voting. Henry Owl had a MA in Cherokee history from University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. This is his dissertation: The Eastern band of Cherokee Indians before and after the removalIn Arizona two Pima Indians (Gila River Indian Community), Peter H. Porter and Rudolph Johnson, attempted to vote in 1928. The Arizona Supreme Court in Porter v. Hall concluded that Indians were not entitled to vote because they were “wards of the government” and persons “under guardianship” were prohibited from voting by the state constitution. Porter v. Hall, 34 Ariz. 308Other states continued to fight voting b Native Americans as well. The Montana state constitution was amended in 1932 to permit only taxpayers to vote. Since Indians on reservations did not pay some local taxes, they could not become voters.A 1937 report by the US Solicitor General found that several states denied Indians the right to vote. It found that four states—Idaho, New Mexico, Maine, and Washington. Colorado’s attorney general replied: “It is our opinion that until Congress enfranchises the Indian, he will not have the right to vote.” Indians were not allowed to serve on juries in Colorado until 1956. Tribal members on reservations were not allowed to vote there until 1970.NC continued to deny Cherokees the vote until after World War II. North Carolina now claimed that Indians were illiterate. The superintendent of the Cherokee Agency reported: “We have had Indian graduates of Carlisle, Haskell, and other schools in stances much better educated than the registrar himself, turned down because they did not read or write to his satisfaction.”In 1940 the Nationality Act which again conferred citizenship on American Indians and required that Indian men register for the draft. In spite of the reconfirmation of citizenship, some states, such as New Mexico and Arizona, refused to allow Indians to vote. The Act was opposed by the Indian Defense League of America. Tuscarora leader Clinton Rickard urged those who wish to volunteer for the armed services do so as alien non-residents.At the Tohono O’Odham village of Toapit in Arizona, 30 men under the leadership of Pia Machita refused to register for the draft in 1904. Marshalls and Indian police attempted to arrest the leader, but they were roughed up and forced to release the 84 year old Machita. The Tohono O’Odham escaped into the desert.During the World War II, 24,521 American Indians served in the military and received the following awards: Air Medal (71), Silver Star (51), Bronze Star (47), Distinguished Flying Cross (34), and Medal of Honor (2). More than 480 Indians were killed during the war. Brigadier General Clarence Tinker, an Osage from Oklahoma, headed the Hawaiian Air Force. Joseph (“Jocko”) Clark, a Cherokee from Oklahoma, was the only Indian naval admiral.In the Pacific, two American Indian Marines were involved in raising the American flag on top of Mount Suribachi on the Japanese island of Iwo Jima.Louis Charlo, the great-grandson of the Bitterroot Salish Chief Charlo, was born in Missoula, Montana in 1926. In November 1943 he enlisted in the U.S. Marines. The battle for Iwo Jima started on February 19, 1945 and four days later Private Charlo and seven other Marines reached the summit of Mount Suribachi. At 10:20 AM, Charlo and the other Marines used a 20-foot section of pipe to raise an American flag from Missoula at the top of the mountain. Several hours later, this flag was replaced by a larger flag. Charlo was killed by a sniper on March 2, 1945Ira Hayes was born in 1923 on the Gila River Pima Indian Reservation. He enlisted in the Marines in August, 1942. He became a “paramarine”. On top of Mount Suribachi, he was one of six Marines photographed raising the second larger American flag. He did not want to be identified but later was. He did not like the attention and had troubles after the war. He was found dead of exposure near his home in Arizona on January 24, 1955, only 32 years old.The draft board in Gallup, New Mexico decided that non-English speaking Navajo were not eligible to be drafted. Tribal leaders objected to the ruling because many Navajo wanted to serve.In Arizona, six Hopi men were arrested for not registering for the draft. The Hopi claimed that registration was against their religious traditions, but a federal judge ruled that these traditions did not have any bearing on draft registration. The Hopi men were sentenced to a year and a day in a prison camp.In New York, the Six Nations Iroquois – Mohawk, Seneca, Oneida, Onondaga, Tuscarora, Cayuga – declared war on the Axis Powers (Germany, Italy, and Japan) in 1942.The Fort Peck Tribal Executive Board (Sioux and Assiniboine tribes) in Montana passed a resolution supporting U.S. involvement in the war and pledged men, women, and materials to the war effort. The Board asked to use $10,000 of their tribal money to purchase defense bonds.On Attu Island in the Aleutians Aleut people were the primary inhabitants. On June 7, 1942, six months after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, the 301st Independent Infantry Battalion of the Japanese Northern Army landed on the island. Three Natives died in the attack. The 42 Attu inhabitants who survived the Japanese invasion were taken to a prison camp near Otaru, Hokkaidō. Sixteen of them died while they were imprisoned.In 1945, a Japanese bomb carried by balloon landed on the Hupa reservation in Northern California.Indian veterans returned home with different expectations about how they were to be treated. They had fought in Europe and in the Pacific and had been treated as equals. They returned home to find that they were still second-class citizens (and in some states, the recognition of their citizenship lacking). The Indian veterans expected to be able to vote and when states attempted to deny them that right, they took their case to the courts. Throughout the country, barriers to Indian voting began to fall. But just as in the segregated South, some other states tried to refuse voting rights. The last states to refuse with state law were New Mexico and Arizona and UtahAfter WWII in 1946, North Carolina county registrars refused to register Eastern Cherokee war veterans to vote. The Cherokee appealed the decision to the governor and attorney general. Nothing was done.In 1948, Miguel Trujillo Sr fought the case in New Mexico. He was a Isleta Pueblo tribal member. He attended the Albuquerque Indian School and then the Haskell Institute in Lawrence, Kan. That is where Trujillo met his wife, Ruchanda Paisano. He eventually earned a bachelor’s degree from the University of New Mexico. He had been in the Marines in WWII. He was back in New Mexico getting his master’s degree from the University of New Mexico. He and his wife also taught at the Bureau of Indian Affairs Laguna Pueblo Day School.The state’s constitution barred American Indians living on reservations from participating in elections. It prohibited from voting “idiots, insane persons, persons convicted of felonious or infamous crime unless restored to political rights, and Indians not taxed.” That had been condemned by the President’s Committee on Civil Rights in 1947. That line in the constitution was written before American Indians were granted citizenship, but they were paying taxes to the state and federal government like other citizens.This is Trujillo and his daughter.Both his son and daughter, Josephine Waconda (in photo), went into medicine. Dr. Michael Trujillo was director of the Indian Health Service under President Bill Clinton.Felix Cohen, a prominent Indian civil rights lawyer took the case. He was Jewish, from New York, and had written The Handbook of Federal Indian Law in 1941. The Court found that New Mexico had discriminated against Indians by denying them the vote, especially since they paid all state and federal taxes except for private property taxes on the reservations.The federal judge said:“We all know that these New Mexico Indians have responded to the needs of the country in time of war. Why should they be deprived of their rights to vote now because they are favored by the federal government in exempting their lands from taxation.”In that same year, in Arizona a lawsuit by another veteran, Frank Harrison and Harry Austin, both Mohave-Apache at the Fort McDowell Indian Reservation, resulted in Indians being able to vote for the first time in that state. (Harrison and Austin v. Laveen). Cohen was also on that case. Harrison and Austin had tried to register to vote in Maricopa County, Arizona, and been denied by the county recorder, Roger Laveen. The Felix Cohen was also one of the attorneys in this landmark case. The National Congress of American Indians, the Department of Justice, and the Department of the Interior also filed amicus curiae (friends of the court) briefs in these cases. In Harrison v. Laveen the Arizona Supreme Court agreed with the plaintiffs that their Arizona and United States constitutional rights had been violated. With this decision, Indians were granted the right to vote in the state of Arizona. Harrison v. LaveenNew Mexico and Utah had said Native people weren’t residents of the state, making them ineligible to vote. The laws remained on the books until 1957 in Utah and 1962 in New Mexico. However Native people were voting in New Mexico after 1948. Here are people registering to vote after the Trujillo decision on 27th of Sept 1948.Utah denied Indians the vote because Indians on reservations were not actually residents of Utah but were residents of their own nations. Indians were thus considered non-residents and hence not eligible to vote. In 1957, the Utah state legislature finally repealed the legislation that prevented Indians living on reservations from voting. It did so only after being forced by a federal judge.New Mexico in 1962, the last state to enfranchise Native Americans. It took five years after that to change the state’s constitution.Today, New Mexico has the highest registration rate for American Indians in the country. According to the National Congress of American Indians, Native Americans 77 percent of potential Native voters are registered to vote, compared to 73 percent for African Americans and 70 percent of white voters, 78 percent Hispanic and 62 percent for Asian Americans.Even with the lawful right to vote in every state, Native Americans suffered from the same mechanisms and strategies, such as poll taxes, literacy tests, fraud and intimidation, that kept African Americans from exercising that right.In 1965, with passage of the Voting Rights Act and subsequent legislation in 1970, 1975, and 1982, voting protections were reaffirmed and strengthened. However, there has needed to be many law cases brought to tr to force states to stop Native people from voting. There have repeatedly been voting rights abuses against Native Americans in Alaska, South Dakota, Montana, Arizona, New Mexico, and other states with significant Native American populations. At least 70 cases have needed to be brought.The Native American Voting Rights Coalition (NAVRC) was formed in 2015 to address this. It is made up of the Native American Rights Fund (NARF); National Congress of American Indians (NCAI); American Civil Liberties Union, Voting Rights Project (ACLU); Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights (LCCR); Fair Elections Center; Western Native Voice; and Four Directions. Home - Native American Voting Rights CoalitionSome recent cases are:October 30, 2018, Spirit Lake Tribe and six individual plaintiffs sued to ensure that eligible Native American voters residing on reservations in North Dakota will be able to cast a ballot in the 2018 midterm elections and in all future elections.On December 13, 2017, the Native American Rights Fund again brought action against the state of North Dakota seeking to overturn North Dakota’s newest discriminatory voter ID law.For decades San Juan County in Utah has prevented Native American representation, voting, and presence on juries. It is an area of 7,933 sq mi. That is bigger than Delaware or Connecticut or NJ. County clerks kept Native candidates off the ballot, refused to register Native voters, and held written elections in English, disenfranchising those who were illiterate or didn’t speak the English well. In the mid-1980s, the U.S. Department of Justice sued San Juan County for violating the Voting Rights Act. Then, the county drew its lines still violated the Voting Rights Act, because it packed minority voters into a single district while spreading the white vote over multiple districts. That meant Native voters could only elect one representative. Navajos were kept off the school board too. A U.S. Department of Justice official who later reviewed disparities in course offerings between the county’s white and Native schools said in 1997 that he “hadn’t seen anything so bad since the ’60s in the South.”Even though Native Americans are the majority in the in the 14,750-person county, the county commissioner and school board district lines were gerrymandered to give white Mormon voters disproportionate power for more than three decades. Under both the Voting Rights Act and Utah state law, counties must redraw voting districts at least every 10 years to ensure that the population is spread evenly across districts. But San Juan County hadn’t redrawn its voting districts since 1986. Actions in the last few years changed that. The 2018 election ended that. Navajo are now the majority on the county commission. Grayeyes wins county seat in historic electionHere is one of the Navajo winners, Kenneth Maryboy.In late 2018, Senator Udall introduced the Native American Voting Rights Act of 2018. It has a poor chance of passing right now because of Republican obstruction and racism. Text - S.3543 - 115th Congress (2017-2018): Native American Voting Rights Act of 2018“In 1948 – 70 years ago – my grandfather, Levi Udall, served as Chief Justice of the Arizona Supreme Court where he authored the opinion extending the right to vote to Native Americans then living on-reservation. My grandfather wrote, ‘To deny the right to vote… is to do violence to the principles of freedom and equality.’ I wholeheartedly agree. But today, 70 years later, state and local jurisdictions continue to erect insidious new barriers to the ballot box for Native Americans, from the elimination of polling and registration locations to the passage of voter ID laws intentionally designed to prevent Native Americans from voting. These undemocratic barriers have blocked too many Native voters across New Mexico and Indian Country from exercising their franchise.”

Your question is quite unclear.What country are you in /asking about? Laws and lawsuits don’t apply to all English speaking countries on the planet. A case ruling in Australia means nothing for a case working its way through a US court system.What type of insurance do you mean - business interruption insurance, health insurance, or some other type of insurance? There is more than one type of insurance.What “test cases” are you referencing? In the US,In terms of business interruption cases By the end of 2020, about 1500 cases had been filed in state an federal court regarding coverage on business interruption insurance policies. Of cases where courts have ruled, the nationwide trend is in favor of insurers. About 70- 75% of cases have resulted in dismissals of the policyholder’s claims. “Approximately 20 cases have proceeded past motions to dismiss and into the discovery phase.” see source article below. (FYI, that is a little more than 1%) I wouldn’t call that some sort of overwhelming affirmation on the policyholder’s position.Cigna was sued by a health practice for failure to reimburse for Covid tests. In CT, the physician group alleges Cigna is violating the Families First Coronavirus Response Act, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act, the ACA, and various Employee Retirement Income Security Act provisions by refusing to cover the claims for COVID-19 testing. I do not know if that suit has been decided or settled. There have been similar suits in other jurisdictions, like NJ.“In a complaint filed Jan. 19 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut, New York resident Dinah Nissen accused Cigna of violating the Employee Retirement Income Security Act by refusing to cover her emergency facial surgery.” See second source article below. Since that case was just filed, there has not yet been a decision.I am sure there are A LOT more, but the point is - without mentioning what type of insurance you mean, there are any number of cases (which you’re calling “test cases” for some reason) which can be precedents for other suits. But how can one comment on how any cases may impact the courts when you neglect to mention the country, the type of insurance or even a case as a reference? You cannot be so vague and expect a legitimate, well-thought out, relevant answerThe courts realize, as should any individual following rulings, that a case is dependent upon the specifics of that situation. Since not all policies contain the same language, coverages and exemptions and not all situations are the same, the courts have and will continue to evaluate each new case on its merits.COVID-Related Insurance Claims Remain a Focal Point as the New Year BeginsAt the start of 2021, one thing is clear: COVID-19 will continue to play a major part in insurance coverage litigation trends in the new year. Until now, the main focus has been on claims for lost bushttps://www.natlawreview.com/article/covid-related-insurance-claims-remain-focal-point-new-year-beginsLawsuit accuses Cigna of using COVID-19 hospital surge to deny claimsLawsuit accuses Cigna of using COVID-19 hospital surge to deny claims Morgan Haefner - Thursday, January 21st, 2021 Print | Email Cigna is facing a lawsuit that accuses the health insurer of inappropriately denying coverage for surgery services that were provided outside of an emergency department because of a surge in COVID-19 patients, according to court documents . In a complaint filed Jan. 19 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut, New York resident Dinah Nissen accused Cigna of violating the Employee Retirement Income Security Act by refusing to cover her emergency facial surgery. According to her complaint, Ms. Nissen said she was bitten on her right cheek by a rescue dog on May 17, 2020. She went to the nearest urgent care center, where a New Hyde Park, N.Y.-based Northwell Health clinician advised her to seek immediate care from a plastic surgeon, according to the complaint. Ms. Nissen said the Northwell clinician checked with two plastic surgeons who were on call in the emergency room at the closest hospital, Stony Brook Southampton (N.Y.) Hospital. According to the complaint, the on-call surgeon suggested that Ms. Nissen should be seen at his office rather than the hospital because of the large number of COVID-19 patients at the hospital. After her procedure, Ms. Nissen received an invoice for the $10,300 procedure on June 16, 2020, which indicated the surgery was emergency, according to the complaint. She submitted a claim to Cigna on June 28, but the insurer rejected the claim on July 13, stating the surgeon wasn't in network and his billing codes didn't indicate an emergency. Ms. Nissen appealed, the complaint states, and the surgeon's biller reached out to Cigna with a letter explaining that the surgery was completed in an office, not an emergency department, because of an influx of COVID-19 cases. However, Cigna maintained its denial based on the fact that the surgeon was out of network, according to the complaint. Becker's Hospital Review reached out to Cigna for comment on the lawsuit, but did not hear back before the time of publication. This article will be updated as more information becomes available. More articles on payers: UnitedHealth's Q4 profit drops 38% as COVID-19 costs grow Cigna wins $5.8M in false claims case UnitedHealthcare launches virtual primary care service with Amwell © Copyright ASC COMMUNICATIONS 2021. Interested in LINKING to or REPRINTING this content? View our policies by clicking here .https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/payer-issues/lawsuit-accuses-cigna-of-using-covid-19-hospital-surge-to-deny-claims.html