The Courts

A federal appeals court panel seems inclined to issue a narrow ruling in a lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s rule expanding association health plans, with two of the three judges on the panel repeatedly asking during oral arguments Thursday (Nov. 14) if they can resolve the case without directly deciding whether the rule violates the Affordable Care Act.

Federal circuit court judges asked government lawyers to explain why CMS believes it has authority to cut back 340B reimbursement, and HHS’ legal team responded that it is not compelled to overpay hospitals.

Stakeholders that support and took advantage of the Trump administration rule expanding association health plans are hopeful a federal appeals court will overturn a district judge’s decision to toss key parts of the rule, which a pro-AHP source argued has upended coverage for thousands of Americans.

A second federal appeals court has sided with CMS and upheld a 2017 rule that prevents hospitals from receiving Medicaid DSH payments to cover costs for which they have already been compensated by Medicare or private insurers.

HHS has sued Gilead for patent infringement after the drug manufacturer repeatedly refused to obtain licenses for HHS patents on an HIV medication. The suit, filed in federal court in Delaware, alleges Gilead willfully infringed on patents given to HHS meant to protect the government’s work in developing pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), and has profited from research funded by taxpayers through the sale of the brand-name drugs Truvada and Descovy, according to HHS.

South Carolina likely violated federal law when it attempted to prevent Planned Parenthood from receiving any Medicaid funding, a federal appeals court recently ruled.

Nearly 68 million women and girls with preexisting conditions risk facing discriminatory insurance pricing or losing coverage if the Affordable Care Act is repealed in the high-profile Texas v. United States case, according to a new report from the Center for American Progress and National Partnership for Women & Families.

Advocacy groups have filed a class action suit challenging the president’s demand that immigrants prove they have obtained health coverage prior to entering the country, arguing the policy is a vast restructuring of the nation’s immigration laws and violates the constitution's separation of powers, due process and equal protection clauses. The advocates seek to immediately and permanently block the administration from implementing the policy, which is set to go into effect on Sunday (Nov. 3).

CMS and New Hampshire are appealing a federal judge’s ruling that blocked the state’s plan to implement Medicaid work requirements.