A contentious legal battle over preventive healthcare coverage mandates reaches the Supreme Court this week, potentially affecting millions of Americans' access to free screenings and medications.
According to the Washington Examiner, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in Kennedy v. Braidwood, examining whether the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force's structure violates constitutional requirements for federal appointments.
The case centers on the 16-member volunteer panel that recommends which preventive services must be covered by insurers without cost-sharing. Trump's administration argues for greater control over the task force's membership and recommendations, while maintaining the Health and Human Services secretary's constitutional authority over the group.
Nearly 30% of privately insured individuals utilize at least one of the ten preventive services mandated by the task force since 2010. For women with private insurance, this figure rises to almost 50%.
The task force's recommendations cover various health services, including cancer screenings, HIV prevention medications, and maternal health interventions. These services are currently provided without patient cost-sharing under the Affordable Care Act.
The Supreme Court's decision to focus solely on the constitutional question marks a significant shift from the case's original religious freedom arguments.
The American Hospital Association warns of potential public health consequences if preventive care coverage requirements are eliminated. According to Laurie Sobel of KFF:
If you were to start chipping away at preventive services, which are a very popular benefit that are widely used, this wouldn't obviously take down all preventative services.
A coalition of states led by Texas contends that insurers would continue offering preventive care coverage regardless of mandates. They argue that requiring presidential nomination and Senate confirmation for task force members would strengthen democratic oversight.
Healthcare attorney Richard Hughes believes recent Supreme Court decisions limiting federal agency power could influence this case's outcome:
The Supreme Court is not predictable, and the trend toward curtailing the role of experts and the administrative state could win the day.
The Justice Department partially aligns with the Biden administration's position that the task force is properly supervised. However, Trump's team advocates for broader HHS authority over member selection and coverage recommendations.
This approach aligns with Trump's broader pattern of asserting more direct control over independent regulatory bodies. The administration recently signed an executive order aimed at making drug costs more competitive.
The case's outcome could enable Trump's HHS to exercise greater discretion in determining which preventive services receive coverage mandates.
The Supreme Court will determine whether the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force's structure violates the Constitution's appointments clause in Kennedy v. Braidwood. This ruling could fundamentally alter how preventive healthcare services are covered under private insurance plans, affecting millions of Americans who rely on these benefits. The court's decision, expected by June or early July, may grant the Trump administration expanded authority over preventive care coverage recommendations while potentially restructuring how these crucial healthcare decisions are made at the federal level.
