Supreme Court Takes on Case That Could Challenge No-Cost Preventive Healthcare Access

This April, the U.S. Supreme Court will discuss a significant case that could affect health care for millions of Americans. The case centers on the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and its rule that insurance companies must provide preventive care at no cost to patients.

If this rule is found unconstitutional, many people may have to pay for preventive care or skip it entirely, according to the Center for Value Based Insurance Design at the University of Michigan. This could especially impact low-income individuals and various racial and ethnic groups. The center warns that if costs for preventive services rise, overall health may decline, and health disparities could widen.

The case, Kennedy v. Braidwood Management, previously known as Braidwood Management v. Becerra, is set for oral arguments on April 21. Recently, the Department of Justice stated it would defend the ACA’s preventive care requirements. The legal debate includes whether members of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force were appointed correctly, raising questions about the constitutionality of their recommendations.

Braidwood Management, a private company from Texas, claims it has religious objections to the ACA’s preventive care rules. These rules include coverage for essential services such as contraceptives, vaccinations, and screenings for various diseases. Section 2713 of the ACA has been crucial in increasing access to these services and has reportedly improved health outcomes for many people.

Further complicating the case, a friend-of-the-court brief from attorneys general in 21 states highlights how, before the ACA, health insurance often excluded many women’s health services. Section 2713 ensures that employers and nearly all private health plans offer over 50 preventive services at no cost, as long as these services are rated as “A” or “B” by the Task Force.

Research shows about 232.6 million Americans had health insurance that covered preventive services without cost-sharing as of 2020. This includes approximately 151.6 million people with private insurance, along with millions covered by Medicare and Medicaid. This represents a significant portion of the country’s population that could be affected by changes to these regulations.

Recently, new recommendations were made by the Preventive Services Task Force for osteoporosis and cancer screenings, emphasizing the importance of preventive care to catch health issues early. If the court rules in favor of Braidwood, many might face higher costs for preventive services, leading to potential reductions in people seeking these vital health checks.

The ongoing discussion surrounding this case highlights the importance of maintaining access to no-cost preventive services. The outcome will impact health equity in America, with broader consequences for those who already face barriers to care.

Source link

ACA,Affordable Care Act,preventive care,SCOTUS,Supreme Court