[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 34.204.202.44. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
Curated health policy research and original commentary from across the JAMA Network
health-forum_ChannelsBanner
[Skip to Content Landing]
JAMA Forum

Looming Legal and Political Fights over Preexisting Condition Protections

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) escaped repeal last year, though Republicans have subsequently taken a number of steps to undermine the law. These actions have certainly wounded the ACA, but not struck at the heart of its benefits or protections. Now, however, a seemingly convoluted legal case bolstered by the Trump administration threatens to do what these legislative and administrative actions could not.

The case was originally filed by a number of Republican state attorneys general. Their legal argument goes like this:

In 2012, the US Supreme Court upheld the ACA’s individual mandate, based on the argument that it was enforced by a tax penalty and that the federal government has the constitutional power to tax.

Limit 200 characters
Limit 25 characters
Conflicts of Interest Disclosure

Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.

Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.

Err on the side of full disclosure.

If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.

Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.

Limit 140 characters
Limit 3600 characters or approximately 600 words
    ×