The lawsuit, Braidwood Management Inc. v. Xavier Becerra, 4:20-cv-00283, (N.D. Tex.), was brought by two Christian-owned Texas businesses opposed to covering the HIV-prevention drug Truvada (and/or Descovy), also known as “PrEP” (short for pre-exposure prophylaxis). That portion of the case — specifically the scope of a panel’s authority — has been sent back to a lower court for review.
Employer Action Items
Health insurers and employers nationwide must continue to provide coverage of certain preventive services like cancer screenings and behavioral counseling at no cost, a federal appeals court ruled June 21, 2024.
PrEP was widely covered by private health insurance plans. Ultimately, should the task force lose its insurance mandate, insurers would not be expected to drop coverage; however, unfortunately, public health experts anticipate many would return to imposing associated out-of-pocket costs, including oftentimes prohibitive co-pays and imposing the requirements of pharmacy deductibles.
Summary
A federal appeals court on June 21, 2024, found a key component of the Affordable Care Act (“ACA”) that grants a health task force the effective authority of the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) to require that insurers both cover an array of preventive health interventions and screenings and refrain from imposing out-of-pocket costs for them unconstitutional.
The lawsuit centered on the objections of a coalition of small businesses in Texas to the requirement that they cover a drug for HIV prevention, known as Truvada (or PrEP), in their employee health plans on the grounds that the USPSTF lacked authority to mandate coverage of the drug regime as preventive under the “Appointments Clause” of the U.S. Constitution. The appeals court did not, however, overturn the related ACA pillar. The practical, immediate impacts of its ruling apply narrowly only to the underlying plaintiffs named in the Braidwood action.
Legal experts expect that the Braidwood action will ultimately find its way to the Supreme Court, given that it poses crucial questions about the constitutionality of the health task force’s effective authority and that of other federal health bodies. Additionally, the current court has demonstrated interest in cases concerning the delegation of congressional authority to agencies and experts.
In response to Friday’s ruling from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans, public health advocates expressed concern that, should the Supreme Court ultimately void the task force’s authority, this could compromise the nation’s already sluggish HIV fight.
A federal judge in the Northern District of Texas overturned the task force’s mandate in 2022, but in 2023, the 5th Circuit stayed that decision and on Friday ruled that it was overly broad. The Circuit Court remanded to a Texas Federal District Court, the job of reviewing the constitutionality of the USPTPF’s and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) powers and authority to mandate insurance coverage for vaccines, contraception, and other women’s preventive services.
It is uncertain if the parties will appeal directly to the Supreme Court in the interim or wait for the suit to wind its way through the lower courts.
Additional Resources
U.S. 5th Circuit Appeals Court Decision –https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/23/23-10326-CV0.pdf https://apnews.com/article/preventative-health-care-obama-appeals-court-cf339b95c1d285e7844225b8021d7e54
For more information
We’re ready when you are. Get in touch and a friendly, knowledgeable Baldwin advisor is prepared to discuss your business or individual needs, ask a few questions to get the full picture, and make a plan to follow up.
This document is intended for general information purposes only and should not be construed as advice or opinions on any specific facts or circumstances. The content of this document is made available on an “as is” basis, without warranty of any kind. The Baldwin Insurance Group Holdings, LLC (“The Baldwin Group”), its affiliates, and subsidiaries do not guarantee that this information is, or can be relied on for, compliance with any law or regulation, assurance against preventable losses, or freedom from legal liability. This publication is not intended to be legal, underwriting, or any other type of professional advice. The Baldwin Group does not guarantee any particular outcome and makes no commitment to update any information herein or remove any items that are no longer accurate or complete. Furthermore, The Baldwin Group does not assume any liability to any person or organization for loss or damage caused by or resulting from any reliance placed on that content. Persons requiring advice should always consult an independent adviser.
The Baldwin Group offers insurance services through one or more of its insurance licensed entities. Each of the entities may be known by one or more of the logos displayed; all insurance commerce is only conducted through The Baldwin Group insurance licensed entities. This material is not an offer to sell insurance.
