Judicial Documents – ACA

2011 2013 2014

protected content

District Court Denies EEOC’s Request for Temporary Restraining Order and Injunction against Company Wellness Program

Today, the judge in the U.S. District Court in Minnesota denied EEOC’s request for a TRO/PI, finding that the Honeywell wellness program inflicted no “irreparable harm”. … More

protected content EEOC Once Again Goes after Employer Wellness Plan; Files for Temporary Restraining Order

Yesterday the EEOC filed for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) and an Expedited Preliminary Injunction in the U.S. District Court of Minnesota, claiming that Honeywell’s wellness program violates both the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA). … More

protected content EEOC Leaps into the Wellness Fray AGAIN

The EEOC has double-downed on their rulemaking-through-lawsuit approach to wellness programs by suing Flambeau, Inc., for a similar violation of the ADA. … More

protected content

Oklahoma District Court Finds Individuals in Federal Exchanges Ineligible for Subsidized Coverage under ACA

The federal district court in Oklahoma today decided to vacate the IRS regulation under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) that permits individuals in states with federal Exchanges to receive subsidized health insurance. … More

protected content D.C. Circuit Court Agrees to Rehear ACA Case Involving Tax Subsidies

The full U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia announced September 4 that it will rehear the case involving whether tax subsidies are available for both the state-based and federally-run exchanges (Halbig v. Burwell).… More

protected content High Stakes Drama at the ACA Corral

Today saw the publication of not ONE but TWO circuit court cases opining on the legality of granting tax subsidies to individuals who purchase health insurance through federally operated Exchanges as opposed to Exchanges operated by the states. … More

protected content SCOTUS Delivers This June’s Verdict on the ACA … and Contraceptives

Today the Supreme Court of the United States, in its last decision of the term, found that the HHS regulations imposing the “no-cost contraceptives” requirement of the Affordable Care Act violate the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 with respect to three for-profit, closely-held corporations. … More

protected content U.S. Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments on ACA Contraception Cases

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments recently, in Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood v. Sebelius, with respect to the contraception coverage mandated by the Affordable Care Act (“ACA”).… More

protected content Second Federal Court Rules against Challenge to Premium Subsidies on Federal Exchanges

The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia on February 18 dismissed a complaint challenging the validity of an Internal Revenue Service rule providing premium assistance subsidies to individuals who purchase health insurance through federally facilitated exchanges in addition to state-run exchanges (King v. Sebelius). … More

protected content Another Threat to the Viability of the ACA Exchanges

The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on October 22 allowed a case to proceed that has the potential to deal a potentially life-threatening blow to the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The case (Halbig v. Sebelius, D.D.C., No. 13-623), along with a similar case in an Oklahoma federal district court (Pruitt v. Sebelius, E.D. Okla, Case No. CIV-11-30-RAW), addresses the ability of an Exchange to offer premium credits and cost-sharing subsidies to enrolled individuals. … More

protected content

Sixth Circuit Appeals Court Finds PPACA Constitutional

On June 29, the first Circuit Court to decide the constitutionality of the individual mandate provision of the Patient Protection and… More

2011 2013 2014