Filter

91 - 100 of 155 Results

  • KFF Health Tracking Poll – April 2019: Surprise Medical Bills and Public’s View of the Supreme Court and Continuing Protections for People With Pre-Existing Conditions

    Feature

    The April 2019 KFF Health Tracking Poll examines the public’s position on the future of ACA and its protections for people with pre-existing medical conditions, in light of the ongoing legal battle which may end up in the Supreme Court. With lawmakers proposing legislation to address surprise medical bills, this month’s survey also measures the public’s support for federal government action to protect patients from having to pay the cost incurred from an inadvertent out-of-network provider.

  • Explaining Stewart v. Azar: Implications of the Court’s Decision on Kentucky’s Medicaid Waiver

    Issue Brief

    This issue brief summarizes the DC federal district court's June 29, 2018 decision in Stewart v. Azar, the lawsuit brought by Medicaid enrollees challenging the HHS Secretary’s approval of the Kentucky HEALTH Section 1115 waiver program, which includes a work requirement, premiums, coverage lockouts, and other provisions that the state estimated would lead 95,000 people to lose coverage.

  • A Guide to the Supreme Court’s Review of the Contraceptive Coverage Requirement

    Issue Brief

    This issue brief dissects the issues raised by the legal challenges to the Affordable Care Act’s requirement that private insurance plans include contraception as part of their coverage of preventive services for women. Over 40 for-profit corporations and over 40 nonprofit corporations have filed lawsuits claiming that the requirement to provide their employees with contraceptives violates their religious rights. On November 26, 2013, the Supreme Court agreed to hear two cases filed by for-profit corporations, Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood Specialties, that claim that this requirement violates their religious rights. At the crux of these cases is a question that the Supreme Court has not previously addressed: Do for-profit corporations have religious protections under the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the First Amendment? The brief provides background on how the ACA’s contraceptive requirement works, summarizes some of the legal challenges brought by for-profit and non-profit organizations and discusses the implications of potential rulings by the Supreme Court.

  • Web Briefing for Media – The Supreme Court, Birth Control, and Religious Freedom: Implications of Zubik v. Burwell

    Event Date:
    Event

    On March 23, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear Zubik v. Burwell, legal challenges brought by nonprofit corporations challenging the Affordable Care Act's contraceptive coverage requirement. The 2014 Hobby Lobby decision established that certain firms with religious beliefs should be relieved of the requirement of paying for contraceptive coverage. In this case, religious nonprofits are objecting to the regulations that the Obama Administration has developed to accommodate their religious objections to birth control, claiming it still burdens their religious beliefs. After the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, this already complicated case has taken on yet an additional question. Given that the Court will be operating with only 8 Justices, what would be the impact of a tie (4-4) decision? To address the legal and policy questions raised by the case, the Kaiser Family Foundation will hold an interactive web briefing exclusively for journalists.

  • A Guide to the Supreme Court’s Review of the 2010 Health Care Reform Law

    Issue Brief

    With the Supreme Court preparing to hear oral arguments about challenges to the 2010 Affordable Care Act in March 2012, this Kaiser Family Foundation brief serves as a primer on the pending case, which challenges the constitutionality both of the law's individual mandate that requires most Americans to obtain health insurance and of provisions requiring…

  • Facing the Fallout From a King v. Burwell Ruling

    From Drew Altman

    With a Supreme Court decision on King v. Burwell looming, this Drew Altman column for The Wall Street Journal’s Think Tank plays out the politics of a ruling for the two major parties.