Short-term health plans expansion upheld in court

Amy Baxter | | Health Exec | Policy & Regulations

The Trump administration’s expansion of short-term limited-duration health plans has held up in court after a legal challenge.

The plans, which are not required to comply with Affordable Care Act standards, were expanded by the Trump administration in August 2018. Democrats in Congress, who have called these plans junk insurance because they do not offer comprehensive coverage, attempted to overturn the expansion in October 2018, but failed.

Now, the plans, which were extended from 3 months to 36 months of allowable coverage, can continue, according to U.S. District Judge Richard Leon.

Short-term limited-duration plans were defined under the ACA by the Obama administration as temporary coverage for those who were between insurance coverage, such as students or those switching jobs. Since then, HHS has promoted these plans as an alternative to ACA plans in the marketplace as a more affordable option.

However, the plans do not meet ACA requirements, which means they do not have to cover pre-existing conditions or have limits on out-of-pocket expenses. According to Judge Leon, HHS does have the authority to change the limits of the duration of these plans, court records revealed.

Amy Baxter
Amy Baxter

Amy joined TriMed Media as a Senior Writer for HealthExec after covering home care for three years. When not writing about all things healthcare, she fulfills her lifelong dream of becoming a pirate by sailing in regattas and enjoying rum. Fun fact: she sailed 333 miles across Lake Michigan in the Chicago Yacht Club "Race to Mackinac."

Related Content

‘A huge win’: CMS significantly increases Medicare payments for cardiac CT
Kentucky AG launches criminal probe after conscious man nearly has organs harvested
FDA announces Class I recall of ventilators after 3 patient injuries
FDA clears AI tool that flags signs of heart disease in chest CT scans
Stewardship Health sale to private equity finalized for $245M
Baxter producing IV solutions ahead of schedule at Asheville-area site

Around the web

Cardiovascular Business
Q&A: Why are cardiovascular devices involved in so many recalls? FDA policies may be to blame

Cardiovascular devices are more likely to be in a Class I recall than any other device type. The FDA's approval process appears to be at least partially responsible, though the agency is working to make some serious changes. We spoke to a researcher who has been tracking these data for years to learn more. 

Cardiovascular Business
Cardiologist compensation still rising, especially in invasive and interventional cardiology

Updated compensation data includes good news for multiple subspecialties. The new report also examines private equity's impact on employment models and how much male cardiologists earn compared to females.

Cardiovascular Business
FDA’s tirzepatide decision creates uncertainty for patients—and leads to a lawsuit

When drugs are on the FDA’s shortage list, outsourcing facilities can produce their own compounded versions. When the FDA removed tirzepatide from that list with no warning, it created a considerable amount of chaos both behind the scenes and in pharmacies all over the country. 

Design by Adaptive Theme
Trimed Popup
Trimed Popup