Can Trump Simply Stop Paying Subsidies to Insurance Companies?

In recent days, President Donald Trump announced, via Twitter, that "If a new HealthCare Bill is not approved quickly, BAILOUTS for Insurance Companies and BAILOUTS for Members of Congress will end very soon!"  He was presumably referring first to cost-sharing reduction subsidy payments to insurance companies required by the Affordable Care Act and, second, to the fact that members of Congress and their staff are required to buy health insurance on the ACA market instead of being allowed on the federal employee health plan.  However, unlike most people who purchase insurance via the marketplace, Congressional staffers still receive an employer subsidy.  Ending subsidy payments to insurance companies could be catastrophic to the market - so can Trump simply stop paying them?

Read more

Health Care for Trans Military Members is Not That Expensive

Today, the President tweeted that he is barring all transgender individuals from serving in the military "in any capacity."  One justification he claimed was their "tremendous medical costs."  But, as STAT points out, "at least two studies in recent years have found that the cost of medical care for transgender service members would be minimal."

Read more

Amicus Brief to U.S. Supreme Court in Expressions Hair Design v. Schneiderman

In 2016, several New York businesses sued the state, claiming that a law prohibiting them from posting about and charging a fee for credit card transactions was an unconstitutional restriction on commercial speech.  The lower court disagreed and the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the case.  As “Constitutional, Administrative, Contracts, and Health Law Scholars,” several George Consortium members filed a brief in support of the state.

Read more

Advancing Public Health Through the Law: The Role of Legal Academics

In July 2012, 25 legal and public health academics convened a workshop to explore ways in which legal academics can better strengthen engagements with public health practice.  The group recognized that the law has always been an integral part of public health, yet legal scholars are too often removed from the front line practice.  In order to bridge this disconnect so that practitioners can benefit from and utilize ongoing legal research, the group pledged: (1) to work together to create a narrative counter to the “public responsibility” trope that dominated public health policy discussions; (2) to reduce overreliance on regulation and focus on shaping social norms directly via the law; (3) to assess the balance between targeting at-risk populations while still respecting rights; (4) to bring focused litigation against regulatory capture; (5) to research the impact of law on health; and (6) to bridge silos in order to create a unified front for improving public health.

Read more