Resources

Client Alerts, News Articles, Blog Posts, & Multimedia

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

Supreme Court Upholds Coverage under the Affordable Care Act

Client Alert

On June 27, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark decision upholding the authority of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) to make determinations about preventive services coverage mandated by the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The ACA mandates that group health plans and health insurance issuers provide coverage for over 100 preventive health services without cost-sharing.

Following the Supreme Court’s ruling, the USPSTF can continue issuing recommendations for services that must be covered by health insurers without cost-sharing.

In Kennedy v. Braidwood Mgmt. Inc., No. 24–316. (S.C. 2025), Braidwood Management (and others) argued that the USPSTF’s requirement to cover an HIV prevention medication violated its religious freedoms.

In its ruling, the Supreme Court reversed a Fifth Circuit decision that had found the delegation of authority to the USPSTF violated the Appointments Clause. The Supreme Court reasoned that USPSTF members are “inferior officers” of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary instead of “principal officers”, despite their independence in the Affordable Care Act context.

As a result, the USPSTF can continue to recommend coverage for preventive services using a grading system. Per the ACA, for covered services with an 'A' or 'B' rating, health plans and insurance issuers offering group or individual insurance coverage “shall, at a minimum, provide coverage for and not impose any cost sharing requirements” for the “evidence-based items or services that have in effect a rating of ‘A’ or ‘B’ in the current recommendations” of the USPSTF. Covered services with an 'A' or 'B' rating include certain cancer screenings, risk-reducing breast cancer medications, statin medications reducing the risk of heart disease and stroke, and physical therapy to help the elderly avoid falls.

The practical coverage provisions of the ACA remain in effect, meaning over 150 million Americans can continue to access a wide range of preventive health care services each year at no cost to them. For providers, this ruling maintains the status quo, ensuring providers can continue to provide screenings and resulting treatment paid for by insurance without having to chase patients for cost sharing amounts.  

The case is Kennedy v. Braidwood Mgmt. Inc., No. 24–316. (S.C. 2025).

To learn more about this ruling and the ACA’s coverage of preventive services, please contact BMD Healthcare Member Daphne Kackloudis at dlkackloudis@bmdllc.com or Attorney Jordan Burdick at jaburdick@bmdllc.com.


Ohio Appellate Court Rules in Favor of Gender-Affirming Care

On March 18, 2025, the 10th District Court of Appeals in Franklin County ruled that Ohio’s House Bill (HB) 68, which restricts puberty blockers and hormone therapy for minors seeking gender-affirming care, violates the Health Care Freedom Amendment and is therefore unenforceable. The court found that the law unlawfully interferes with parental rights and medical decision-making. The case, Moe v. Yost, has been remanded, and Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost intends to appeal.

HHS Revokes Public Comment Requirement on Certain Policy Changes

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has revoked the Richardson Waiver, eliminating the requirement for public notice and comment on certain policy changes. This decision allows HHS to implement new policies more quickly, potentially affecting healthcare funding rules like Medicaid work requirements. While it speeds up policymaking, it also reduces opportunities for stakeholder input, raising concerns over transparency and unintended consequences for healthcare providers, states, and patients.

Don't Get Caught Dazed and Confused: Another Florida Court Weighs in on Employer Obligations to Accommodate Medical Marijuana Use

A Florida trial court ruled in Giambrone v. Hillsborough County that employers may need to accommodate off-duty medical marijuana use under the Florida Civil Rights Act (FCRA). This contrasts with prior rulings and raises new compliance challenges for employers. With the case on appeal, now is the time to review workplace drug policies.

Corporate Transparency Act to be Re-evaluated

Recent federal rulings have impacted the enforceability of the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA), which took effect on January 1, 2024. While reporting requirements were briefly reinstated, FinCEN has now paused enforcement and is reevaluating the CTA. Businesses are no longer required to submit reports until further guidance is issued. For updates and legal counsel, contact BMD Member Blake Gerney.

Ohio Recovery Housing Operators Beware: House Bill 58 Seeks to Make Major Changes

Ohio House Bill 58 proposes significant changes to recovery housing oversight, granting ADAMH Boards authority to inspect and investigate recovery residences. The bill also introduces a Certificate of Need (CON) program, requiring state approval for major facility changes. OMHAS will assess applications based on cost, quality, accessibility, and financial feasibility. The bill also establishes a recovery housing residence fund to support inspections. For more information, contact BMD attorneys Daphne Kackloudis or Jordan Burdick.