Ohio’s $900M Federal Pandemic Aid Lawsuit Against DeWine

The Ohio $900 million pandemic unemployment lawsuit, State ex rel. Bowling v. DeWine, is a class action brought by roughly 300,000 Ohio workers who were cut off from the federal $300-per-week pandemic unemployment supplement ten weeks before it was set to expire. The case is now before the Ohio Supreme Court for a second time, and the justices will decide whether Governor Mike DeWine had the authority to end Ohio’s participation in the program and whether the state must now go back to the U.S. Department of Labor to collect an estimated $900 million in benefits those workers never received.

What DeWine Did in 2021

The Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation program, created by the CARES Act, added $300 a week to unemployment checks for workers who lost jobs during COVID-19. Congress funded it through September 2021, but let states opt out early on 30 days’ notice to the U.S. Department of Labor.

On May 13, 2021, DeWine announced Ohio would leave the program. He sent the formal termination letter on May 24, and payments stopped after the benefit week ending June 26, 2021. Business groups had urged the move, arguing the extra $300 was discouraging people from returning to work. Ohio was one of roughly two dozen states that pulled out before the September expiration.¹²

The Legal Argument

On July 6, 2021, attorneys from DannLaw and Advocate Attorneys filed a mandamus action for workers cut off from the benefit. The lead plaintiff, Candy Bowling, had lost her job inspecting airplane parts when air travel collapsed. The case grew into a class action covering more than 300,000 Ohioans eligible for payments during the ten-week gap between Ohio’s withdrawal and the program’s federal expiration.³⁴

The plaintiffs rely on Ohio Revised Code § 4141.43(I), a Depression-era statute requiring the director of the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services to “cooperate with the United States Department of Labor to the fullest extent” and to secure all available advantages under federal unemployment law. Because FPUC was a federal benefit available to Ohio workers, the plaintiffs argue, only the General Assembly, not the governor, could walk away from it. They call DeWine’s termination letter executive overreach that violated the separation of powers.⁵⁶

How the Case Moved Through the Courts

The lawsuit has been in Ohio’s court system for more than five years and has reached the state Supreme Court twice.

In 2021 the Franklin County Common Pleas Court denied a temporary restraining order, but on August 24, 2021, the Tenth District Court of Appeals reversed, ordering the state to stay in the program and denying DeWine’s motion to dismiss.⁷
In November 2022 the Ohio Supreme Court unanimously dismissed the appeal as moot, with no separate opinions explaining the reasoning. Justice Emanuella Groves sat in place of Justice DeWine, who was recused.⁸
The plaintiffs’ attorneys took the case back to Franklin County, arguing the 2022 dismissal addressed only the preliminary injunction and never resolved the question of the governor’s authority.
On February 12, 2025, Judge Michael Holbrook ordered DeWine and the Department of Job and Family Services to reinstate FPUC and “take all action necessary” to obtain Ohio’s share of benefits from the U.S. Department of Labor, finding that FPUC was one of the “available advantages” the cooperation statute required the state to secure.⁹
On July 1, 2025, the Tenth District Court of Appeals affirmed Holbrook’s order.⁴
On October 28, 2025, the Ohio Supreme Court accepted jurisdiction for a second review.¹⁰
Oral arguments were held on May 20, 2026, with no ruling date announced.

What the State Is Arguing

The DeWine administration, represented by Solicitor General Mathura Sridharan, is pressing three main arguments.

The case is moot. FPUC expired in September 2021, and Sridharan told the Supreme Court that continued litigation is a “waste of judicial resources.” Chief Justice Sharon Kennedy pressed the same point at oral argument, questioning why the case had returned after the 2022 dismissal and noting that federal rules permitted states to exit on 30 days’ notice.¹¹

The law has changed. Through House Bill 33 in 2023, the General Assembly amended the cooperation statute to state explicitly that nothing in it “precludes the director from ceasing to participate in any voluntary, optional, special, or emergency program offered by the federal government.” The state argues this confirms the governor’s authority and makes the lower court rulings a “dead letter.”

FPUC was never covered to begin with. The state contends the CARES Act programs were never part of the original federal-state unemployment compact the cooperation statute implements, so the statute never required Ohio to join FPUC. The Buckeye Institute, a conservative policy organization, has filed three amicus briefs supporting the state, arguing that a writ of mandamus requires a “current” legal duty and that no such duty survives either the program’s expiration or the statutory amendment.¹⁰

Is the $900 Million Still Available?

The practical question for workers is whether the federal money can still be paid out even if they win in Columbus. The plaintiffs say yes, and they rely on two things.

First, a September 3, 2021, email from Jim Garner, the Department of Labor’s Administrator of the Office of Unemployment Insurance, told state officials that states could retroactively re-enroll claimants in pandemic programs, whether voluntarily or by court order, and should process claims “as if there had been no effective termination.” As of April 2025, the Department of Labor confirmed that guidance remains “valid and in effect.”¹² Second, the plaintiffs argue Congress appropriated the FPUC money “without fiscal year limitation,” so the funds have not expired.¹¹

That availability is being challenged in Washington. On June 9, 2025, Republican members of the House Ways and Means Committee wrote to Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer asking the department to issue guidance declaring it is “prohibited by law from obligating federal funds for payment of retroactive CARES Act unemployment benefits.” The letter was signed by Committee Chairman Jason Smith, Subcommittee Chairman Darin LaHood, and Ohio Representatives Mike Carey and Max Miller, and raised concerns about “possible retroactive payments to fraudsters due to lack of documentation of eligibility.” As of the letter’s publication, the Labor Department had not publicly responded.¹³

What Happens Next

No timeline for a ruling has been set, and more than three years passed between the court’s first dismissal and the return of the case.¹ If the court sides with the workers, Ohio will be ordered to request retroactive FPUC payments from the U.S. Department of Labor for the roughly ten-week gap, an estimated $900 million spread across the class of about 300,000 claimants. If it sides with the state, the lower court rulings are reversed and class members receive nothing. Even a win in Columbus does not guarantee a check: the federal government still has to agree to pay, and the Ways and Means letter signals that fight may be the next one.

1
Statenews.org. Ohio Supreme Court to Decide if DeWine Could Close $300 Weekly Pandemic Check Program Early
2
The Century Foundation. 7.5 Million Workers Face Devastating Unemployment Benefits Cliff on Labor Day
3
Signal Cleveland. Ohio Supreme Court Takes Case of $900 Million in Unclaimed Pandemic Unemployment Money
4
Statenews.org. Ohio Workers Who Claim They’re Owed $900M in Unemployment COVID Funds Win Again in Court
5
DannLaw. DannLaw Asks Court to Compel Governor DeWine to Reverse Decision to Cut Off Federal Unemployment Benefits
6
DannLaw. Bowling v. DeWine Appellate Brief
7
Ohio Capital Journal. Ohio Supreme Court Sides With DeWine in Unemployment Case
8
Supreme Court of Ohio. State ex rel. Bowling v. DeWine, 2022-Ohio-4122
9
Vindicator. Judge Orders Reinstatement of Federal Pandemic Program
10
Buckeye Institute. The Buckeye Institute Files 3rd Brief in Pandemic-Era Unemployment Bonus Case
11
Ohio Capital Journal. Ohio Supreme Court Hears Second Round of Arguments Over Pandemic-Era Unemployment Benefits
12
U.S. House Ways and Means Committee. Ways and Means Letter to DOL Regarding Ohio FPUC Lawsuit
13
Washington Times. GOP Aims to Stop Retroactive Pandemic Unemployment Payments