42 U.S.C. § 1320a-2. Section 1320a-2 precludes defendant from relying on the plan requirement language of Section 1396r-6. Because all of the language of Section 1396r-6 except the “plan requirements” language, reflects Congress’s intention to confer a right to TMA upon persons who meet the various eligibility requirements, we find that Section 1396r-6 can support a Section 1983 claim. The only relevant post -Gonzaga precedent from the Courts of Appeals supports this holding. See Gean v. Hattaway, 330 F.3d 758, 772-73 (6th Cir.2003) (finding that Medicaid recipients may bring a Section 1983 action for breach of the Medicaid Act’s fair hearing provision assuming that they failed to receive complete and adequate medical benefits); Bryson v. Shumway, 308 F.3d 79, 88-89 (1st Cir.2002) (<HOLDING>). Cf. Wilder v. Virginia Hosp. Assoc., 496 U.S.
holding that plaintiff had failed to state a claim for relief under section 1983 holding that section 1396aa8 which requires that state medicaid plans provide that medical assistance shall be furnished with reasonable promptness to all eligible individuals supports a section 1983 claim holding that the federal supplemental nutrition assistance program  mandating that assistance under this program shall be furnished to all eligible households 7 usc  2014acreated a privately enforceable statutory right holding that a state is required to provide medical care to incarcerated individuals holding that  1396aa8 is enforceable by medicaid recipients under  1983