Products, Vendors, CAD Files, Spec Sheets and More...
Sign up for LAWeekly newsletter
The Idaho Supreme Court recently ruled that Ada County, Idaho should have paid for medical care for a man who could not afford to pay his bill even though the man was not in the United States legally.
Javier Ortega Sandoval had a stroke in 2006 while working for an Eagle landscaping company and spent two months at St. Alphonsus Regional Medical Center, according to court documents. His total bill: $187,000.
When Sandoval?EUR??,,????'???s family appealed to the county for indigency funds, the county commissioners denied him benefits because he had come to the United States illegally.
A lower court upheld the county decision, but the Supreme Court ruled 2-1 on Monday that immigration status is not relevant to county indigency fund rewards.
?EUR??,,????'??First, Sandoval?EUR??,,????'???s status as an undocumented alien does not affect the determination of whether he is a resident of Ada County. The concept of residency does not distinguish between citizens and those who have entered this country illegally,?EUR??,,????'?? the justices wrote.
Justice Warren Jones dissented, arguing that Sandoval was living in the county only temporarily and thus not eligible for support.
County officials declined comment on the case but could ask for a rehearing.
The hospital brought the case against the county, hoping to recover some of the cost for care.
?EUR??,,????'??It?EUR??,,????'???s consistent with our mission to serve all people who walk through our doors,?EUR??,,????'?? said Kristen Micheletti, director of marketing and communications for the hospital.
Paying the medical bills of those in the country unlawfully has been a hot button issue in the United States. Much to the chagrin of illegal immigration opponents, the presumptive presidential nominees in each party, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) support the renewal of a $250 million-a-year program that will pay illegal immigrants?EUR??,,????'??? hospital bills.
In 2005, health care providers began charging the government for emergency care provided to illegal aliens. Under guidance by The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services lawmakers set aside $1 billion over four years for the program.
Federal law forbids hospitals from turning anyone away from emergency rooms, regardless of immigration status or ability to pay for care. Hospitals have been complaining for a decade about the increasing financial burden they bear treating illegal immigrants. Congress responded by creating this funding stream in 2003; it is set to expire at the end of this fiscal year.
In the Sandoval case, the issue was who was going to pay for his hospital stay. The editorial board of the Idaho Statesman newspaper believes the court made the right decision:
?EUR??,,????'??Twenty-seven months after Sandoval?EUR??,,????'???s stroke, the Supreme Court?EUR??,,????'???s task Monday was to settle up the tab. Even though taxpayers are responsible for indigent medical costs, the county argued that this requirement does not extend to an illegal immigrant. Facing the prospect of eating Sandoval?EUR??,,????'???s bills, the hospital argued for payment from the government.
The court was handed both a hot-button issue and a less-than-crystalline passage of state law. The law defines an Idaho resident as anyone living at the same address for 30 days ?EUR??,,????'??? but also says a resident ?EUR??,,????'??does not include a person who comes into this state for temporary purposes, including, but not limited to, education, vacation, or seasonal labor.?EUR??,,????'??? The law does not address immigration status ?EUR??,,????'??? which, of course, would have simplified the court?EUR??,,????'???s job.
Sandoval met the 30-day requirement, leaving the court to deduce whether he considered his stay in Idaho temporary.
Writing for the court?EUR??,,????'???s 4-1 majority, Justice Roger Burdick said Sandoval met Idaho?EUR??,,????'???s residency requirements ?EUR??,,????'??? and offered, perhaps unwittingly, an indictment of American enforcement of immigration law. ?EUR??,,????'??While Sandoval may have been subject to deportation proceedings, there is nothing in the record to indicate that this possibility created in him a subjective intent to return immediately to Mexico.?EUR??,,????'????EUR??,,????'??
Sources: Boise Weekly, The Hill, Idaho Statesman
Francisco Uviña, University of New Mexico
Hardscape Oasis in Litchfield Park
Ash Nochian, Ph.D. Landscape Architect
November 12th, 2025
Sign up to receive Landscape Architect and Specifier News Magazine, LA Weekly and More...
Invalid Verification Code
Please enter the Verification Code below
You are now subcribed to LASN. You can also search and download CAD files and spec sheets from LADetails.