On October 21, 2024, a multistate coalition of 24 attorneys general filed an amicus brief before the U.S. Supreme Court in support of the Affordable Care Act's preventive care mandate. The challenged mandate requires private insurers to cover an array of preventive services (such as cancer screening, tobacco cessation, contraception, and immunizations) at no cost to consumers.
The case, Xavier Becerra vs. Braidwood Management, Inc., et al., involves a challenge to the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, which sits within the Public Health Service of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and was instructed by Congress to issue recommendations for preventive medical services that, under the preventive services provision, health insurance issuers and group health plans must cover without imposing additional out-of-pocket expenses on patients.
In June 2024, the Fifth Circuit partially upheld a March 2023 ruling from a Texas district court and determined that the structure of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force violates the Appointments Clause because its members are principal officers of the United States who must be (but are not) nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate. On that basis, it affirmed an injunction prohibiting the federal government from enforcing the preventive services provision against respondents.
Currently, the Supreme Court is considering whether to hear the case. The attorneys' general amicus brief urged the Supreme Court to grant certiorari and make clear that the Task Force's structure is constitutional and that the preventive services provision can be enforced. The brief was filed by the attorneys general of Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin.
A copy of the brief may be found here.
Disclaimer: This Alert has been prepared and published for informational purposes only and is not offered, nor should be construed, as legal advice. For more information, please see the firm's full disclaimer.
