Staff Reports
Here’s the short version: after years of being blocked by Louisiana’s Facility Need Review (FNR) process, New Orleans social worker Ursula Newell‑Davis is back in court. A new state‑court petition filed in March challenges the state’s “prove you’re needed” rule. The Pacific Legal Foundation is handling the case, and John Stossel’s update this week brought the fight back into the light—along with the surprising fact that Ms. Newell‑Davis now runs a neighborhood fried‑chicken shop that employs special‑needs teens because state regulators shut down her plan to expand respite care.
The new lawsuit and what it asks for
The March state filing seeks declaratory and injunctive relief to stop Louisiana’s FNR from blocking new respite‑care providers. The petition names Bruce D. Greenstein, Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Health, as a defendant and asks the court to declare the rule unlawful. Pacific Legal Foundation attorney Anastasia Boden, Director of Constitutional Scholarship, says the state “gives you no clue about how to prove you’re needed.” That is the legal hook: after federal courts rejected Newell‑Davis and the Supreme Court declined review in 2023, plaintiffs returned to state court to try another path forward.
What the FNR/CON system really does
Facility Need Review is Louisiana’s version of a Certificate‑of‑Need program. It forces entrepreneurs to convince state bureaucrats there is a public “need” before they can open certain health and home‑care services. The result is predictable: nearly 75% of applicants were turned away in the period cited by challengers. Thirty‑five states still have CON rules in some form, but Louisiana stands out for applying its FNR to social workers trying to offer short‑term respite care. In plain terms, it gives incumbents — hospitals and big agencies — power to block small providers who want to help local families.
Real people lose when regulators play favorites
This is not abstract. Parents and kids lose access to help. Kamal, one young client, said Ursula “helped teach me how to talk to people.” Families praised her work. Yet regulators told a licensed social worker with two decades of experience that she hadn’t proved her business was “needed.” When the courts and agencies close doors, talented people pivot. Newell‑Davis bought Chubbie’s Fried Chicken and now employs special‑needs teens there. Cute pivot—sad reason. The state’s rule didn’t protect consumers; it protected incumbents who don’t want competition.
Fix the rule, free the helpers
States have a choice: protect consumers or protect cartels. Evidence shows CON/FNR programs often raise costs and reduce access. Legislatures and courts should ask a simple question: who benefits when a mother can’t find respite care but a big provider keeps a monopoly? If the answer is not the public, then it’s time to repeal or narrow these rules. Ms. Newell‑Davis shouldn’t have to sue to do honest work. Bureaucrats are great at forms and fear; they are terrible at helping people. Let the entrepreneurs try, let the families choose, and stop letting regulators decide who is “needed.”
