The fate of the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) promise of free preventive care for over 150 million Americans hangs in the balance as a federal appeals court prepares to hear arguments this Monday regarding the Biden administration’s appeal of a critical case.
Last year, a federal judge in Texas dealt a significant blow to the ACA, ruling that the law’s mandate requiring employers and insurers to cover various preventive services, including cancer screenings and HIV prevention, was unconstitutional.
Healthcare Costs on Patients
This ruling also invalidated the requirement for employers to cover preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV prevention.
If upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, this decision could force patients to bear the full cost of essential treatments and screenings that are currently provided at no cost, fundamentally reshaping the landscape of health coverage.
Without the mandate, health plans and employers may opt to exclude certain preventive services, potentially deterring patients, particularly those with limited means, from accessing critical healthcare procedures.
Since its enactment in 2010, the ACA has faced over 2,000 legal challenges, with ongoing attempts to undermine its provisions.
The law mandates insurers to cover over 100 preventive health services without cost-sharing, based on recommendations from the US Preventive Services Task Force.
Read more: How To Find Out How Much You Owe In Taxes To The IRS
ACA: Legal Battles and Preventive Care Mandates
The current legal battle stems from a lawsuit filed by conservative Texas employers and individuals challenging the Task Force’s authority, arguing that its recommendations are binding despite members not being appointed or confirmed by the President or Senate.
Judge Reed O’Connor, known for previous rulings against the ACA, ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, invalidating the Task Force and certain mandates within the ACA.
The Biden administration appealed to the 5th Circuit, which temporarily paused the ruling last summer, pending further review. However, the case remains complex, as O’Connor’s decision only applies to preventive care recommendations adopted after 2010, potentially leaving insurers in a regulatory limbo regarding coverage of essential services.
Public health advocates warn of the grave implications of dismantling the ACA’s preventive care provisions, emphasizing the threat to public health. As the legal battle unfolds, the stakes remain high, with the potential for the case to reach the Supreme Court, underscoring the ongoing struggle to uphold key provisions of the ACA amid legal challenges.
Read more: Congress Considers Ending Retirement Tax Breaks: A Boost For Social Security?
