Nicholas Bagley, JD, professor at Michigan Law at the University of Michigan, speaks about the benefits of ongoing communication about the effects of the Braidwood ruling and what will be done to keep preventive care accessible.
Nicholas Bagley, JD, professor at Michigan Law at the University of Michigan, discusses what will be done to protect preventive care after the ruling in the Braidwood v Becerra case and what can be gained from ongoing discussions with policymakers and legislators.
Transcript
What can be gained from speaking with legislators, policymakers, and the general public on these issues in terms of future policies?
If you're speaking to Congress, I think you say, "Look, the preventive services mandate is an extremely popular part of the Affordable Care Act [ACA]; it's part of the Affordable Care Act that has reached more than 150 million Americans. It is not a controversial provision, it's not caught up in hot-button battles over whether or not the ACA should have existed. It's just about providing high-quality preventive care." It shouldn't be a partisan issue, it should be an easy fix, and it should be something that that we can get agreement on across the aisle to be pushing for a legislative fix, to take this case and knock it out before it gets going.
In terms of the message to the public, it's that there could be some changes potentially coming down the pike. It won't happen right away, but it is a concern and we should be demanding, from our elected representatives, that they make good common sense decisions about coverage of preventive services. Nothing stops Congress from fixing this in my view. So fix it.
What are some things you expect to happen to keep preventive care accessible?
Apart from a push from the legislature, the government's going to take this appeal, it will take it up to the US Court of Appeals circuit, and depending on what happens there, the federal government may [bring it to the] Supreme Court for a final call. That's going to take a lot of time. I don't expect a final ruling in this case from the US Supreme Court for at least a couple of years.
In the meantime that gives a lot of room to Congress to fix this before it spirals out of control. And hopefully, too, the federal government will prevail and the preventive services mandate will be restored in the way that it was originally intended. But I think we should be open-eyed about the possibility the case could go south, and we should be doing everything we can to keep up the pressure on Congress to come up with a fix.
Targeting the Root of gMG With Inebilizumab: A Q&A With Richard Nowak, MD, MS
June 24th 2025In this interview, Richard J. Nowak, MD, MS, principal investigator of the MINT trial of inebilizumab for generalized myasthenia gravis (gMG), discusses the trial’s key findings, including significant improvements in patient- and physician-assessed outcomes, as well as longer-term implications and future areas of investigation.
Read More
Many Patients Stop GLP-1s Before Reaching Target Dose: Hamlet Gasoyan, PhD
June 19th 2025Discontinuing the weight loss treatment before hitting the recommended maintenance dose contributes to low-value care despite provider follow-up and efforts to manage side effects, says Hamlet Gasoyan, PhD, Cleveland Clinic.
Read More
Stuck in Prior Auth Purgatory: The Hidden Costs of Health Care Delays
June 19th 2025Delays, denials, and endless paperwork—prior authorization isn’t just a headache for providers; it’s a barrier for patients who need timely care, explains Colin Banas, MD, MHA, chief medical officer with DrFirst.
Listen
New Insights Into Meth-Associated PAH Care Gaps: Anjali Vaidya, MD, on Closing the Divide
June 4th 2025Research from Anjali Vaidya, MD, FACC, FASE, FACP, Temple University Hospital, reveals critical care gaps for patients with methamphetamine-associated pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), emphasizing the need for early diagnosis and integrated support.
Read More