This Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured video segment returns to the plaintiffs of the Olmstead case five years after the landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision. It reports on the impact of the decision for individuals with disabilities and some of the challenges that remain in the implementation of…
- view as grid
- view as list
This issue brief examines the federal courts’ role to date in interpreting and affecting implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), with a focus on the provisions that seek to expand access to affordable coverage.
The Affordable Care Act (ACA) requires most private health insurance plans to provide coverage for a broad range of preventive services including FDA approved prescription contraceptives and services for women. Legal challenges and recently issued rules have affected contraceptive coverage for many women.
The Affordable Care Act’s requirement that most private health insurance plans provide contraceptive coverage has been the focus of ongoing litigation in the federal courts. In response to recent Supreme Court actions in the Hobby Lobby and College of Wheaton cases, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services issued…
As the Affordable Care Act (ACA) marks its fifth anniversary, this month’s poll finds the gap between favorable and unfavorable opinions of the law has narrowed to the closest margin in over two years. Although the Supreme Court heard oral arguments for the King v. Burwell case in early March, the majority of the public continues to say they have heard only a little or nothing at all about the case. The survey also includes a look at Americans’ experiences reporting their insurance status on their taxes for the first time, and finds that nearly half are unaware that the requirement to report health insurance status on their taxes takes effect this year.
Are Premium Subsidies Available in States with a Federally-run Marketplace? A Guide to the Supreme Court Argument in King v. Burwell
This issue brief examines the major questions raised by King v. Burwell, explains the parties’ legal arguments, and considers the potential effects of a Supreme Court decision about the availability of the Affordable Care Act’s premium subsidies in states with a Federally-run Marketplace.
This perspective addresses how insurance markets might respond if the US Supreme Court sides with the plaintiffs in the King v. Burwell case. The case challenges the legality of premium and cost-sharing subsidies for low- and middle-income people buying insurance in states where the federal government rather than the state is operating the marketplace under the Affordable Care Act (ACA).
New Kaiser Policy Insight and Issue Brief Examine Policy Implications and Legal Arguments in the U.S. Supreme Court’s King v. Burwell Case
With the Supreme Court set to hear oral arguments in King v. Burwell on March 4, a new Policy Insight from the Kaiser Family Foundation’s Larry Levitt and Gary Claxton explores the policy implications for consumers and insurance markets if the Court were to side with the plaintiffs in the…
At Five Year Anniversary of the ACA, Gap Between Favorable and Unfavorable Views Among The Public Narrows to Smallest Spread in More Than Two Years
Most Expect Negative Consequences if Supreme Court Prohibits Subsidies in States Without Their Own Insurance Exchanges; Two Thirds of the Public and Those in Affected States Want Congress or Their State to Close Any Gaps As April 15 Tax Deadline Nears, Nearly Half Unaware Insurance Reporting Requirement Starts This Year…
Explaining Armstrong v. Exceptional Child Center: The Supreme Court Considers Private Enforcement of the Medicaid Act
On January 20, 2015, the United States Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Armstrong v. Exceptional Child Center, a case that raises the issue of whether Medicaid providers can challenge a state law in federal court on the basis that it violates the federal Medicaid Act and therefore is preempted by the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution. This issue brief examines the major questions raised by the Armstrong case, explains the parties’ legal arguments, and considers potential effects of a U.S. Supreme Court decision.