Why a US Judge Paused Several Provisions of the Marketplace Rule - MedCity News
Briefly

Why a US Judge Paused Several Provisions of the Marketplace Rule - MedCity News
"A federal district judge in Baltimore issued a stay in August on several provisions of the Trump administration's Marketplace Integrity and Affordability Rule. The rule aimed to reduce fraud, waste and abuse in the Affordable Care Act Marketplaces, but would have also led to significant coverage losses (up to 1.8 million people). It would tighten eligibility verifications for ACA plans, shorten the annual open enrollment period, and prohibit subsidies to ACA plans for gender-affirming care, among other changes."
"The lawsuit challenging the rule was filed by the cities of Columbus, Baltimore and Chicago, as well as Doctors for America and Main Street Alliance (a network of small business owners). They argued the rule violates the Administrative Procedure Act, which governs the process by which federal agencies can create regulations. The court found that the plaintiffs would likely succeed on their challenges to several provisions."
""The Trump-Vance administration is making life harder for working Americans," said Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward. "It should be doing everything possible to increase access to affordable health care, but this administration seems intent on making accessing basic health care harder. We are pleased the court has stepped in, and we will continue to pursue this case to ensure that the Affordable Care Act fulfills its promise of affordable, accessible health care for all.""
A federal district court in Baltimore halted multiple provisions of the Marketplace Integrity and Affordability Rule days before the rule would take effect. The rule sought to cut fraud and abuse in ACA Marketplaces but threatened up to 1.8 million coverage losses by tightening eligibility verifications, shortening open enrollment, and banning subsidies for gender-affirming care. Plaintiffs including the cities of Columbus, Baltimore, and Chicago, along with Doctors for America and Main Street Alliance, argued the rule violated the Administrative Procedure Act. The court found the plaintiffs likely to succeed on several claims. A separate attorneys general lawsuit remains pending.
Read at MedCity News
Unable to calculate read time
[
|
]