logo
Health Law-Preventive Services
FILE - The healthcare.gov website is seen on Dec. 14, 2021, in Fort Washington, Md. A federal appeals court was scheduled to hear arguments Monday, March 4, 2024 on whether former President Barack Obama's signature health care law requires full insurance coverage of certain types of preventive care, including HIV prevention and some types of cancer screenings. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon, File)

Latest attempt to chip away at 'Obamacare' questions preventive health care

A federal appeals court is considering whether the government properly put in place requirements that health insurance plans affecting an estimated 150 million Americans must cover certain types of preventive care

By KEVIN McGILL
Published - Mar 04, 2024, 05:13 PM ET
Last Updated - Mar 04, 2024, 05:13 PM EST

NEW ORLEANS (AP) — Whether health insurance plans affecting an estimated 150 million Americans must cover certain types of preventive care at no cost — including HIV prevention and some types of cancer screenings — was debated before federal appellate judges Monday in the latest legal battle involving former President Barack Obama's signature health care law.

The requirements were adopted by federal health officials under provisions of that law, sometimes referred to as Obamacare. U.S. District Judge Reed O'Connor ruled last year that the requirements violated the Constitution because they came from a volunteer task force, not from constitutionally appointed officials.

“These are preventative services provisions that are critical and lifesaving to millions of Americans and to enjoin the federal government nationwide from enforcing those preventative care coverage requirements and vacating them as to the entire country is unwarranted and unjustified,” Daniel Aguilar, arguing for the Biden administration, told a panel of three judges with the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans.

The government argues that the task force members have been legally appointed by Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra and that he properly ratified their recommendations. An attorney for the policy's challengers argued that the recommendations must come from appointees who are directly supervised by an appointee of the president who has been confirmed by the Senate. The task force members don't meet that test, said Jonathan Mitchell, attorney for Braidwood Management and other plaintiffs, some of whom opposed the required coverage for religious reasons.

Our Offices
  • 10kInfo, Inc.
    13555 SE 36th St
    Bellevue, WA 98006
  • 10kInfo Data Solutions, Pvt Ltd.
    Claywork Create
    11 km, Arakere Bannerghatta Rd, Omkar Nagar, Arekere,
    Bengaluru, Karnataka 560076
4.2 12182024