The plaintiffs allege that enforcing the Affordable Care Act’s nondiscrimination protections related to providing gender-affirming care or coverage for such care violates the Administrative Procedure Act and is unconstitutional under the Spending Clause, the nondelegation doctrine, and the Eleventh Amendment. The Affordable Care Act protects against discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, or sex. People who fall in those categories have historically faced various difficulties accessing health care services and have faced worse health outcomes.
Potential Impact
Eroding the Affordable Care Act’s nondiscrimination protections would exacerbate the challenges faced by marginalized groups, especially LGBTQI+ people, in accessing needed services and care and further widen health gaps.
Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act, Administrative Procedure Act- Contrary to Law, Administrative Procedure Act- Arbitrary and Capricious, Nondelegation Doctrine, Spending Clause, Eleventh Amendment
Date Filed May 30, 2024 Case Type Civil Court Type District Court Court Mississippi Southern Judge Guirola, Louis Jr. Appointed By: George W. Bush Plaintiff(s) State of Tennessee, State of Mississippi, State of Alabama, State of Georgia, State of Indiana, Commonwealth of Kentucky, State of Ohio, Commonwealth of Virginia, State of West Virginia, State of Kansas, State of Louisiana, State of Nebraska, State of Oklahoma, State of South Carolina, and State of South Dakota Lead Counsel For Plaintiff(s) Government Defendant(s) U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Xavier Becerra, Melanie Fontes Rainer, Chiquita Brooks-LaSure, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Lead Counsel for Defendant(s) Government
O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law
Georgetown University Law Center
600 New Jersey Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20001
Phone: (202) 662-9203 | Fax: (202) 662-4045
© All Content Copyright O'Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law or Georgetown University