Law Commons^™

The Sex Equality Gap: How The 20th Century Sex Equality Paradigm Continues To Leave Women Of Color Behind, Center For Gender And Sexuality Law

Center for Gender & Sexuality Law

The United States has a sex equality problem that disproportionately impacts women of color. Despite the passage of sweeping federal, state, and local laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex in employment, education, public benefits, housing, healthcare, voting, and in significant aspects of the U.S. economy and society, women — and particularly women of color — continue to experience persistent sex discrimination. These laws, starting with the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and the Civil Rights Act of 1964, make up what we call the 20th Century Sex Equality Paradigm.

At face value, such laws can be …

Congressional Myopia In Biomedical Innovation Policy, W. Nicholson Price Ii

Reviews

Innovation policy is hard. Getting it right requires balancing incentives for developers, consumer access, rewards for later innovators, safety concerns, and other factors. This balance is vitally important and wickedly difficult—even when it’s the focus of concerted, careful, informed effort. How well should we expect it to go when innovation policy is made by accident? Enter The Accidental Innovation Policymakers, an illuminating new project by Professor Rachel Sachs. Sachs persuasively shows how Congress has repeatedly made substantial changes to innovation policy, seemingly without talking about, seriously considering, or even recognizing that it is doing so. There’s an asymmetry to this …

California V. Texas — Ending The Campaign To Undo The Aca In The Courts, Nicholas Bagley

Articles

On June 17, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court, by a 7-to-2 vote, rejected what will probably be the last major case seeking to uproot the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Although skirmishes over the law and its implementation will persist, the Court’s decision most likely marks an end to Republicans’ efforts to achieve in the courts what they have been unable to achieve in Congress.

What's Left Of The Affordable Care Act?, Helen Levy, Andrew Ying, Nicholas Bagley

Articles

We assess the progress of the Affordable Care Act a decade after it became law. Although most of it remains intact, some parts have been repealed and others have not been implemented as expected. We review how and why the law has aged. Legal challenges have done less damage than is commonly appreciated, with the exception of the Supreme Court case that thwarted full expansion of Medicaid. Most of the important changes have other sources. Some parts were born to fail. Others were dismantled in response to interest-group pressure. Still others have failed to thrive for any number of reasons. …

Immigration Update: Ninth Circuit Rules Against Trump Ban On Uninsured, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Executive Power And The Aca, Nicholas Bagley

Book Chapters

As with any law of its complexity and ambition, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) vests in the sitting president broad implementation discretion. The law is not a blank check: in many ways both large and small, the ACA shapes and constrains the exercise of executive power. But Congress has neither the institutional resources nor the attention span to micromanage the rollout of a massive health program. It has no choice but to delegate.

Naturally, both President Obama and President Trump have drawn on their authority to tailor the ACA to their policy preferences. Neither president, however, has been able to …

Texas V United States: The Affordable Care Act Is Constitutional And Will Remain So, Lawrence O. Gostin

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

On December 14, 2018, in a widely reported decision, a federal judge in Texas ruled that the entire Affordable Care Act (ACA) is unconstitutional. The judge reasoned that since the ACA’s “individual mandate” is unconstitutional, the rest of the law cannot stand without it. However, the ACA will remain in place pending appeal, and it is highly unlikely that this ruling will stand.

Women Of Color And Health: Issues And Solutions, June Cross, Nia Weeks, Kristen Underhill, Chloe Bootstaylor

Faculty Scholarship

Chloe Bootstaylor: Welcome to our second panel. This panel focuses on women of color in health, issues, and solutions. The session is inspired by Professor June Cross of the Columbia School of Journalism and her recent film, Wilhemina’s War, which follows the story of Wilhemina Dixon and depicts the obstacles that Americans with HIV/AIDS face in accessing not only adequate healthcare but also financial, infrastructural, and social support in their communities.

This panel will consist of Professor Underhill and Nia Weeks. June Cross will join us a little later on. We will start with a clip from her film, …

Columbia Law Experts Denounce Federal Guidance Allowing Religious And Moral Discrimination In Contraceptive Coverage, Public Rights/Private Conscience Project

Center for Gender & Sexuality Law

Columbia Law School’s Public Rights/Private Conscience Project (PRPCP) condemns the Trump administration for issuing sweeping new rules today that roll back the Affordable Care Act (ACA)’s birth control benefit, by broadening exemptions for employers who claim religious or moral objections to offering birth control to their workers. These regulations place the religious and moral views of employers above the health and wellbeing of their workers and gut the contraceptive coverage provision of the ACA by dramatically reducing access to affordable birth control. Rather than protecting religious freedom for all Americans, these regulations are part of the current administration’s ongoing effort …

Trouble On The Exchanges — Does The United Owe Billions To Health Insurers?, Nicholas Bagley

Articles

Yet another bruising fight has erupted over health care reform. On September 9, 2016, the Obama administration offered to open settlement negotiations with health insurers that have sued the United States to recover billions of dollars that they claim they are owed. Congressional Republicans are incensed, believing that any settlement would illegally squander taxpayer dollars in a lastgasp effort to save the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

Comments Submitted To The Department Of Health And Human Services Regarding Religious Exemptions To Contraceptive Coverage, Public Rights/Private Conscience Project

Center for Gender & Sexuality Law

Following the Supreme Court's decision to vacate and remand the cases in Zubik v. Burwell, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued a request for information on alternative ways to accommodate religious nonprofits from compliance with the contraceptive mandate of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), CMS-9931-NC. The following comment, from the Law, Rights, and Religion Project, explains that the ACA's existing religious accommodation complies with federal law, and that expanding the accommodation in a way that harms employees and their families would risk violating the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Further, this comment highlights the effects an …

What's At Stake For Women Of Color In Zubik V. Burwell, Public Rights/Private Conscience Project

Center for Gender & Sexuality Law

In March 2016, the Law, Rights, and Religion Project issued a memorandum analyzing the potential outcomes of the Supreme Court case, Zubik v. Burwell. Per the Law, Rights, and Religion Project's analysis, if the plaintiffs in Zubik v. Burwell win, thousands of women of color who work at religious non-profits could be stripped of their right to no-cost insurance coverage for contraception. That’s what at stake in the latest Supreme Court case challenging the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) contraceptive mandate. This fact sheet explores what women of color have at stake in this round of litigation over the ACA.

Brief For Amici Curiae Church-State Scholars In Support Of Respondents In Zubik V. Burwell, Elizabeth Boylan

Center for Gender & Sexuality Law

The Law, Rights, and Religion Project assisted the Counsel for Church-State Scholars in the preparation of an amicus brief submitted in the Supreme Court of the United States case of David A. Zubik, et al., v. Sylvia Burwell, et al.

The Picture Begins To Assert Itself: Rules Of Construction For Essential Health Benefits In Health Insurance Plans Subject To The Affordable Care Act, Wendy K. Mariner

Faculty Scholarship

As the ACA shifts the function of health insurance from voluntary contract to a means of financing health care, it poses some challenges to traditional doctrines for interpreting health plan provisions. This article explores whether and how the doctrine of reasonable expectations and rules of statutory interpretation might apply to Essential Health Benefits coverage. A functional approach linking the two into a doctrine of reasonable statutory expectations could move us toward developing more consistent rules of interpretation within a more realistic conception of contemporary health insurance.

The Legality Of Delaying Key Elements Of The Aca., Nicholas Bagley

Articles

Under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), the employer mandate — the requirement that most employers offer health insurance to their workers or pay a tax penalty — was scheduled to go into effect on January 1, 2014. Last summer, however, the Obama administration announced that it was delaying the mandate for a year. The administration has now extended the delay for midsize firms until 2016.

Health Insurance Is Dead; Long Live Health Insurance, Wendy K. Mariner

Faculty Scholarship

Today, health insurance is no longer simply a class of insurance that covers risks to health, and it has not been so for many years. Health insurance has become a unique form of insurance — a mechanism to pay for healthcare that uses risk spreading as one of several pricing methods. The Affordable Care Act builds on this important payment function to create a complex social insurance system to finance healthcare for (almost) everyone. This article examines how the ACA draws on various conceptions of insurance to produce a quasi-social insurance system. This system poses new challenges to laws governing …

Federalism By Waiver After The Health Care Case, Samuel Bagenstos

Book Chapters

The Supreme Court's Spending Clause holding in National Federation of Independent Businesses v. Sebelius (NFIB) is likely to be consequential for many reasons. It will have a direct effect on the implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which relied on the expansion of Medicaid-now made voluntary by the Court-to obtain health care coverage for more than fifteen million previously uninsured people. At this writing, it remains unclear how many states will participate in the expansion. The Congressional Budget Office recently estimated that, as a result of the Court's decision, three million fewer people will obtain new Medicaid coverage under …

Constitutional Uncertainty And The Design Of Social Insurance: Reflections On The Aca Case, Michael J. Graetz, Jerry L. Mashaw

Faculty Scholarship

The Health Care Case is best understood as a legal attack on the means but not the goals of the health care legislation. This emphasis on means rather than ends and on state over federal powers potentially poses significant risks for the complex institutional arrangements for social insurance that now exist and may imply harmful constraints on how Congress can restructure these programs to better meet the needs of the American people in the twenty-first-century economy. Not coincidentally, the new constitutional framework announced in the ACA decision favors those who want to dismantle rather than strengthen the nation’s social insurance …

Transcript: The Case For National Political (Rather Than State Or Judicial) Regulation Of Healthcare, Abigail R. Moncrieff

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

One place where judges are becoming increasingly involved is in dormant Commerce Clause cases, and it would have been possible to issue the exact same holding in Sorrell by using dormant commerce analysis. To make the exact same challenge (it would have been up to the litigants, but) it would have been possible to present a similar challenge on dormant Commerce Clause grounds and to have said that this creates uneven regulation for pharmaceutical companies that need to craft different marketing approaches for different states according to different rules about what kinds of data they're allowed to use and not …

The Positive Case For Centralization In Health Care Regulation: The Federalism Failures Of The Aca, Abigail R. Moncrieff, Eric Lee

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

Although the ACA accomplishes significantly greater centralization of authority for healthcare regulation, it falls far short of the full centralization that seems functionally justified. There is no doubt that the states have played an important role in healthcare regulation throughout the nation's history, but that role is becoming increasingly irrelevant as healthcare regulation becomes increasingly technocratic—i.e., increasingly objectivist and data-driven. The ACA is a step in the right direction, but the U.S. should further centralize authority over healthcare.