The Supreme Court to Revisit ACA’s Preventive Care Mandates Amid Religious Concerns
The U.S. Supreme Court is set to reconsider aspects of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) related to no-cost preventive care, following a legal challenge by a Christian business. This decision comes after an appeals court sided with the company, which argued that some ACA mandates infringed upon its religious beliefs.
In a recent order, the Supreme Court announced it would hear the case of Becerra v. Braidwood MGMT., Inc., et al.. This case challenges the constitutionality of certain ACA preventive care requirements, which a lower court had previously invalidated.
The ACA, enacted in 2010, requires most private insurers to offer preventive care services at no added cost to consumers. Braidwood Management, a Christian-owned business insuring over 70 employees, along with six Texas individuals, contested these provisions.
The business contended that covering preexposure prophylaxis and HIV prevention drugs contradicts its religious beliefs. Plaintiffs in the case argued these drugs “encourage and facilitate homosexual behavior” and objected to required contraceptive coverage, which they claimed could “induce abortions.”
Following a favorable ruling for the plaintiffs by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in June, federal officials appealed. The Texas district court had originally sided with the plaintiffs, deeming all mandates from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force since 2010 unconstitutional due to the task force’s lack of presidential nomination and Senate approval, which violated the appointments clause.
The 5th Circuit’s ruling was specific, protecting only the plaintiffs from compliance and leaving broader regulations intact. Circuit Judge Don Willett noted the task force’s “unreviewable power” to mandate preventive-care coverage without proper appointment as per Article II of the U.S. Constitution.
“And because Xavier Becerra, in his capacity as the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, has not validly cured the Task Force’s constitutional problems, the district court properly enjoined the defendants from enforcing the preventive-care mandates to the extent they came at the recommendation of the Task Force,” Judge Willett wrote.
In response to the ruling, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services filed an appeal, with Solicitor General Elizabeth B. Prelogar warning in a court filing that overturning these mandates could disrupt healthcare for millions.
Both parties have urged the Supreme Court to settle the issue, acknowledging that analogous lawsuits could lead to widespread effects for Americans.
This case joins a series of challenges to the ACA, which has faced over 2,000 legal proceedings in different courts since its inception, as reported by the Kaiser Family Foundation.
As the Supreme Court takes on this significant case, the potential impacts under the upcoming administration remain uncertain with President-elect Donald Trump’s impending inauguration.
This article was originally written by www.christianpost.com
