The Ohio unemployment lawsuit, State ex rel. Bowling v. DeWine, is a class action asking the Ohio Supreme Court to order the state to recover roughly $900 million in federal pandemic unemployment benefits that Governor Mike DeWine cut off ten weeks early in June 2021. If the plaintiffs win, as many as 300,000 Ohio workers could receive back payments averaging about $3,000 each. The court heard oral arguments on May 20, 2026, and a decision is expected to take months.1Spectrum News 1. Ohio Supreme Court Weighs Pandemic Unemployment Benefits Case
What the Lawsuit Is About
Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation (FPUC) was a federally funded $300 weekly supplement paid on top of regular state unemployment benefits. It was scheduled to run through September 6, 2021. On May 13, 2021, DeWine announced Ohio would stop participating effective June 26, giving about 30 days’ notice. The Ohio Department of Job and Family Services cited an “abundant supply of vaccines and plenty of available jobs.”2Ohio Department of Job and Family Services. $300 Weekly Unemployment Supplements Ending June 26
Former Ohio Attorney General Marc Dann, through DannLaw and Zimmerman Law Offices, sued on behalf of lead plaintiff Candy Bowling and the workers who lost the supplement.3DannLaw. Plaintiffs Ask Tenth District Court of Appeals to Order State to Take All Steps Necessary to Preserve FPUC Unemployment Benefits Their legal theory rests on Ohio’s unemployment cooperation statute, which they argue requires the governor to “secure” all “available advantages” from federal programs, and reserves to the General Assembly, not the governor, any decision to turn those advantages down.4Court News Ohio. State Ex Rel. Bowling v. DeWine Case Preview
Who Would Be Covered and How Much Is at Stake
The class covers Ohio workers who were receiving regular state unemployment benefits and lost the $300 federal supplement when the state exited the program on June 26, 2021, through the program’s scheduled September 6, 2021, expiration. That’s roughly 300,000 households. The pool of federal money the plaintiffs want the state to claim is approximately $900 million, which works out to about $3,000 per person on average. If the court orders the payout, it would be the largest retroactive unemployment payment any state has made.5Ohio Statehouse News Bureau. Ohio Supreme Court to Decide if DeWine Could Close $300 Weekly Pandemic Check Program Early
Where the Case Stands
The case first reached the Ohio Supreme Court in 2022, which dismissed it as moot because the federal program had already expired. Plaintiffs returned to the lower courts, arguing the dismissal addressed only their emergency injunction requests, not the governor’s authority or the availability of back payments.6Ohio Capital Journal. Ohio Supreme Court Hears Second Round of Arguments Over Pandemic-Era Unemployment Benefits
In February 2025, Franklin County Common Pleas Judge Michael Holbrook ruled for the plaintiffs and ordered DeWine to “take all action necessary” to secure the outstanding benefits. Judge Holbrook then stayed his own order while the state appealed.7Ohio Capital Journal. Ohio Workers Waiting on Long-Delayed Pandemic Unemployment Benefits Will Have to Keep Waiting On June 30, 2025, the Tenth District Court of Appeals unanimously affirmed. Judge Shawn Dingus wrote that the 2022 dismissal was based on mootness rather than the merits, and that the state had not proved recovery of the funds was impossible.8Ohio Capital Journal. Ohio Appeals Court Orders Gov. DeWine to Reclaim Pandemic Unemployment Funds
At the May 2026 oral arguments, Ohio Solicitor General Mathura Sridharan urged the court to treat the case as “quintessentially moot” and expressed skepticism that any federal money remains available.1Spectrum News 1. Ohio Supreme Court Weighs Pandemic Unemployment Benefits Case Plaintiffs’ attorney Andrew Engel of DannLaw countered that Congress appropriated FPUC funds “without fiscal year limitation,” so the money has not disappeared. Chief Justice Sharon Kennedy appeared sympathetic to the state, questioning why the court was revisiting a dismissed matter and noting DeWine had complied with the federal 30-day notice provision.6Ohio Capital Journal. Ohio Supreme Court Hears Second Round of Arguments Over Pandemic-Era Unemployment Benefits
Is the Federal Money Still Available?
The answer determines whether a court victory would actually produce checks. The plaintiffs rely on a September 3, 2021, email from Jim Garner, then the U.S. Department of Labor’s Administrator of the Office of Unemployment Insurance, advising state labor officials that states could retroactively re-enroll claimants in pandemic programs — whether voluntarily or under court order — and should process payments “as if there had been no effective termination.”9U.S. House Committee on Ways and Means. Letter to DOL Regarding Ohio FPUC Lawsuit In a July 2024 declaration, Garner said this guidance still represented the Department’s position, and in April 2025 the DOL confirmed to Congress that the guidance remained “valid and in effect.”10Policy Matters Ohio. Bowling v. DeWine Amicus Brief
Congressional Republicans have pressed the DOL to rescind that guidance. In a June 9, 2025, letter, House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith and others asked Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer to formally withdraw the Garner interpretation, warning that an Ohio plaintiff win would compel the DOL to pay out nearly $1 billion.11Washington Times. GOP Aims to Stop Retroactive Pandemic Unemployment Payments As of the latest filings in the case, the DOL has not issued the requested rescission. Since the June 2025 letter, the DOL has published 37 other guidance documents, none addressing the matter.12Supreme Court of Ohio. Bowling v. DeWine Docket Filing
Why Ohio Workers Have a Case When Other States’ Workers Don’t
If you lost the $300 supplement in another state, this ruling won’t help you. Lawsuits challenging early FPUC opt-outs were filed in at least 15 states, including Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Maryland, Missouri, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and West Virginia. Every one of those cases has been dismissed or reversed on appeal.13U.S. House Committee on Ways and Means. Ways and Means Members Call on Labor Department to Prevent Retroactive Pandemic Unemployment Payments Courts in Indiana, New Hampshire, Maryland, and Iowa variously found that governors had authority to withdraw, that the only duty was to give 30 days’ notice, or that private citizens had no right to sue. Ohio’s case has survived because of the specific language of its cooperation statute, which plaintiffs read as imposing a mandatory duty on the governor to secure every available federal advantage.
What Happens Next
The Ohio Supreme Court will issue a written decision in the coming months. If the court sides with the plaintiffs, the state would be ordered to request the funds from the U.S. Department of Labor, and whether checks actually go out would then depend on how the DOL responds — including whether the Garner guidance is still in force at that time. If the court sides with the state, on mootness or on the merits of the governor’s authority, the case ends and no back payments will be made. Ohio workers who lost the $300 supplement don’t need to file anything in the meantime; the class action covers the group.