The Biggest Healthcare Fraud Bust in Years—and Two Supreme Court Cases That Matter

This week's legal roundup covers a $6.5 billion fraud crackdown, the Etan Patz murder case, and a constitutional challenge to federal firearm restrictions. Spoiler alert: Firearms won.

This week, the Department of Justice announced it has charged 455 defendants in connection with over $6.5 billion in healthcare fraud. The 2026 National Health Care Fraud Takedown is one of the largest on record, spanning 50 U.S. states and territories and resulting in the seizure of over $182 million in cash and other assets. And as part of this week’s Lawsplainer, we also review the Supreme Court’s decision to keep a murderer behind bars and its ruling on the constitutionality of a law that prohibited an occasional marijuana user from possessing a firearm.

As July 4^th approaches, check out our America250 sale at DefendingtheRepublic.org. Everything is 50% off. LICENSED TO LIE: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice is on sale for only $4.99. These are high-quality paperbacks using the same paper and print as the hardbacks. Hardbacks are sold-out. Rush Limbaugh recommended this book repeatedly. Get yours now—and they make great gifts too.

Source: Getty Images

National Health Care Fraud Takedown charges 455 defendants with over $6.5 billion in alleged fraud

On Tuesday, as part of the 2026 National Health Care Fraud Takedown, the Department of Justice announced charges against 455 defendants – including 90 doctors and medical professionals – “for their alleged participation in health care fraud and opioid abuse schemes involving over $6.5 billion in false claims and significant patient harm, including death.”

Source: Department of Justice

In addition, as a result of unprecedented international cooperation, the Department of Justice was able to charge, apprehend and return to the United States a number of fugitives that defrauded the United States, including: a defendant in the Republic of Cyprus charged in connection with an alleged $3.7 billion scheme; two defendants in Estonia whose fraud totaled over $10.6 billion; and a fraudster in the Philippines who charged $1.2 billion in a telemedicine scheme.

One defendant – a nurse practitioner charged in the Southern District of Texas – allegedly “billed Medicare more than $1 million per patient on average” as part of her alleged “$906 million scheme.” The indictment charges she used these funds to build a $4.6 million beach resort in the Philippines and spent millions on luxury vehicles and jewelry. And in the Eastern District of New York, eight defendants are alleged to have committed a $38 million fraud for adult day care services that were never provided.

This is the interior of a Brooklyn adult day care center where fraudulent bills “claimed hundreds of beneficiaries received services per day.” Source: Department of Justice.

The Takedown is a huge success that builds upon other health care fraud cases, such as the Minnesota Health Care Fraud that charged over 15 defendants for over $90 million in fraudulent Medicaid charges. And it is likely just the tip of the iceberg. For far too long, American taxpayers have enriched those who have abused our public health programs. This, we hope, is just the beginning of the Trump Administration’s efforts to end the billion-dollar fraud industry once and for all.

Source: KC Baker

Supreme Court restores conviction in murder of Etan Patz

The tragic disappearance of 6-year-old Etan Patz in Manhattan captured the attention of the Nation in 1979. He left his family’s apartment to take a bus to school – but before that, he stopped to buy a drink at a bodega where 18-year-old Pablo Hernandez worked. Patz did not get on the bus, and he was never seen again.

In 2012, Hernandez confessed to Patz’s murder to detectives and prosecutors. One of those confessions was made before he was read his Miranda rights. (He would also confess to his family and a psychiatrist while he was in custody.)

Hernandez was eventually convicted of the kidnapping and murder in 2017 by a Manhattan jury. He challenged that conviction in a federal district court, filing an application for a writ of habeas corpus and alleging the trial court gave an incorrect jury instruction regarding whether his confession was voluntary. The district court ruled that the instruction was a harmless error. On appeal, a panel of the Second Circuit reversed that decision, concluding the error was not harmless and ordering the release of Hernandez unless the State of New York gave him a new trial.

The Supreme Court, in a per curium opinion, held that the Second Circuit exceeded federal law governing a federal courts’ power to grant habeas relief to a prisoner convicted in state court. It reasoned that neither the Constitution nor federal law require a trial court to instruct a jury on the grounds for suppressing a confession. As a result, Hernandez will serve the rest of his 25-years-to-life sentence.

Source: Adobe Stock

Supreme Court rejects limits on gun rights

In an opinion written by Justice Neil Gorsuch, the Supreme Court held that a federal statute that prohibits the possession of a firearm by a user of an unlawful controlled substance was unconstitutional as applied to a defendant who used marijuana a few times a week. It rejected the Government’s arguments that to prosecute under that statute, it need not show whether the marijuana effected the user or whether he posed a danger to himself or others as a result of his marijuana use.

This ruling is narrow; it does not address efforts to ban the possession of firearms by those using more dangerous drugs, and it does not address whether the Government could prosecute marijuana users under that statute where the use of the drug renders him dangerous.

Justice Clarence Thomas, in his concurring opinion, agreed that the application of the federal statute violated the Second Amendment. He wrote separately to call attention to the fact that the federal statute “exceeds Congress’s enumerated power to regulate interstate commerce.” He (correctly) reasoned that the law “criminalizes possession of firearms apart from any purchase or sale of goods and services across state lines.” The power to criminalize the possession of a firearm by a user of a controlled substance is relegated to the States, not the federal government.