Skip to main content

The new lawsuit to save Obamacare, explained

Patient groups are taking the Trump administration to court.

Dylan Scott
Dylan Scott is a senior correspondent and editor for Vox’s Future Perfect, covering global health. He has reported on health policy for more than 10 years, writing for Governing magazine, Talking Points Memo, and STAT before joining Vox in 2017.

Patient groups are taking the Trump administration’s new regulations expanding short-term insurance to court.

In a new lawsuit filed Friday in federal court, they argue that those rules are so contrary to the purpose of the Affordable Care Act that they must be blocked under the law that governs federal regulations.

The groups — including the National Alliance on Mental Illness, Mental Health America, and the Association for Community Affiliated Plans — said that the recent expansion of those short-term plans, which do not have to comply with Obamacare’s provisions protecting preexisting conditions, was “contrary to law, and is arbitrary and capricious.”

They argue that the Trump administration’s regulations therefore violate the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which bars federal rules from being arbitrary or capricious.

”The Departments’ justifications for this rule are directly contrary to the congressional determinations embodied in the text and structure of the ACA,” their lawsuit alleges. “If the rule is permitted to stand, it will thwart rather than further Congress’s objectives in enacting that law.”

I asked Yale Law’s Abbe Gluck and Case Western’s Jonathan Adler about the lawsuit. Adler said that, while he was still reviewing the particulars of the legal argument, the litigation appeared to have merit. Gluck said she thought the plaintiffs’ complaint made “a compelling argument.”

At its core, the legal theory is strikingly simple: Congress passed Obamacare to ensure that people with preexisting conditions could afford health insurance and that all essential benefits would be covered by a person’s insurance plan.

Short-term insurance, which can deny people with preexisting conditions coverage and is not required to cover many routine services, is contrary to both of those objectives. Instead, the regulations should be read as part of Trump’s self-stated goal to destroy the ACA, the groups assert.

”Like any law, the ACA can be repealed by act of Congress. But Congress has repeatedly rejected attempts to repeal the ACA,” the lawsuit states. “Now, with the issuance of the [short-term] Rule, the Departments seek to do by executive fiat what could not be accomplished through the required constitutional process.”

They cite the Trump administration’s own projections that premiums will increase in the Obamacare markets as a result of expanding short-term plans. They also point to anecdotes about people who had a short-term plan only to discover in a medical emergency that their care wouldn’t be covered.

They take particular issue with the Trump administration’s definition of “short-term” as 364 days (“99.7% as long as marketplace plans is contrary to the plain meaning of the phrase ‘short-term’ and to the structure of the ACA”) and “limited duration” as a plan that can be renewed for three years.

”The Departments’ interpretation of ‘limited-duration’ as encompassing plans that can be renewed for a total of 36 months is not consistent with the text or structure of the Affordable Care Act,” the plaintiffs argue.

The patient groups also allege the Trump administration made some technical violations of the APA during the notice-and-public-comment period that is required by the federal law for all newly issued regulations.

The litigation expands the legal battleground over the ACA. A Texas federal judge sounded receptive last week to arguments that the law is now unconstitutional after the individual mandate was repealed. Democratic state attorneys general have filed a separate suit asking for an injunction to uphold the law.

Now Obamacare’s defenders are advancing the case that, in sabotaging the health care law, the Trump administration is acting unlawfully.

This story appears in VoxCare, a newsletter from Vox on the latest twists and turns in America’s health care debate. Sign up to get VoxCare in your inbox along with more health care stats and news.

Join the conversation

Are you interested in more discussions around health care policy? Join our Facebook community for conversation and updates.

More in Politics

The Supreme Court will decide whether to let criminals get guns without a background checkThe Supreme Court will decide whether to let criminals get guns without a background check
Supreme Court

The Court considers legalizing “ghost guns,” untraceable weapons that evade laws intended to keep guns away from criminals.

By Ian Millhiser
Trump and Harris could raise taxes without asking Congress. Congress should stop them.Trump and Harris could raise taxes without asking Congress. Congress should stop them.
Policy

Why are tariffs the only tax that Congress doesn’t need to approve?

By Dylan Matthews
What will the Supreme Court unleash on America in its new term?What will the Supreme Court unleash on America in its new term?
Supreme CourtMember Exclusive

The justices return to Washington after an unforgivable betrayal.

By Ian Millhiser
Abortion groups are raising more money than ever. Where exactly is it going? Abortion groups are raising more money than ever. Where exactly is it going? 
Policy

Activists confront competing priorities, tactics and goals ahead of Trump and Harris’s match-up in November

By Rachel M. Cohen
California’s governor has vetoed a historic AI safety billCalifornia’s governor has vetoed a historic AI safety bill
Future Perfect

SB 1047 would have been a landmark in AI safety. Gavin Newsom’s veto is a major setback in the fight against AI risk

By Sigal Samuel, Kelsey Piper and 1 more
What Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah’s death means for war in the Middle EastWhat Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah’s death means for war in the Middle East
Everything you need to know about Israel-Palestine

Will Hezbollah escalate the fight against Israel?

By Nicole Narea