Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Becerra v. San Carlos Apache Tribe, 602 U.S. ___ (2024), was a United States Supreme Court case which determined that the federal government must provide additional funding to cover some third-party administrative costs incurred by Native American tribes that operate their own health-care programs.
The 5-4 decision means the government will cover millions in overhead costs that two tribes faced when they took over running their health care programs under a law meant to give Native Americans ...
National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, 567 U.S. 519 (2012), is a landmark [2] [3] [4] United States Supreme Court decision in which the Court upheld Congress's power to enact most provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), commonly called Obamacare, [5] [6] and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act (HCERA), including a requirement for most ...
Since the passage of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), there have been numerous actions in federal courts to challenge the constitutionality of the legislation. [1] [2] They include challenges by states against the ACA, reactions from legal experts with respect to its constitutionality, several federal court rulings on the ACA's constitutionality, the final ruling on the constitutionality of the ...
The Supreme Court on Aug. 16, 2024, kept preliminary injunctions preventing the Biden-Harris administration from implementing a new rule that widened the definition of sex discrimination under ...
United States, 590 U.S. ___ (2020), was a United States Supreme Court case involving the expired Risk Corridors program of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), through which the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) mitigated losses of unprofitable healthcare plans through the profits of the profitable plans during the ...
The 19th explains that the stakes in United States v. Skrmetti are even higher than most Americans realize. If the court rules to keep the ban on gender-affirming care in place, the consequences ...
Azar v. Allina Health Services, 587 U.S. ___ (2019), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held the Department of Health and Human Services' new policy to retroactively reduce Medicare payments must be vacated due to the department's failure to uphold its notice-and-comment obligations.