News & Analysis as of

Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) › Civil Rights Act › Bostock v Clayton County Georgia

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPAC), also known as Obamacare, is a United States federal statute passed in March of 2010. The Act creates a nationwide insurance system and provides federal... more +
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPAC), also known as Obamacare, is a United States federal statute passed in March of 2010. The Act creates a nationwide insurance system and provides federal subsidies to reduce the number of uninsured citizens. less -
Seyfarth Shaw LLP

HHS’ Withdrawal of 2022 Guidance Raises Questions about Coverage for Gender-Affirming Care

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

In a move with potentially significant implications for entities subject to the Affordable Care Act, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has reversed course and now contends that Section 1557 of the Affordable...more

Snell & Wilmer

2024 End-of-Year Plan Sponsor “To Do” List (Part 1) Health and Welfare

Snell & Wilmer on

We are pleased to present our annual End of Year Plan Sponsor “To Do” Lists. This year, we present our “To Do” Lists in four separate SW Benefits Updates. This Part 1 covers year-end health and welfare plan issues. Parts 2,...more

ArentFox Schiff

Court Holds NC State Health Plan Constitutes “Health Program or Activity,” Granting Summary Judgment for Transgender Plaintiffs...

ArentFox Schiff on

On December 5, 2022, the US District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina held that the North Carolina State Health Plan (NCSHP) constitutes a “Health Program or Activity” under the Affordable Care Act (ACA). In so...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

HHS Issues Proposed Rule Under Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act: Nondiscrimination in Health Programs and Activities

McDermott Will & Schulte on

On August 4, 2022, the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM or proposed rule) to reinterpret section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which prohibits...more

Foley Hoag LLP

Biden Administration Proposes Significant Revisions to Trump-Era Nondiscrimination Regulations

Foley Hoag LLP on

On July 25, 2022, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office for Civil Rights (OCR) released a long-awaited proposed rule on Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), the nondiscrimination protections...more

Ballard Spahr LLP

Court Issues Injunction Against Revised ACA Nondiscrimination Rules

Ballard Spahr LLP on

The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York blocked federal rules seeking to remove nondiscrimination protections for health care patients. The blocked rules would have removed protections against...more

Rivkin Radler LLP

Federal Court Blocks HHS Rule on Sexual Orientation

Rivkin Radler LLP on

The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York has blocked the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) from enforcing a new rule that limited sex discrimination in healthcare to discrimination based...more

Fisher Phillips

A Simplified View Of The Supreme Court’s 2019-2020 Workplace Law Term

Fisher Phillips on

Supreme Court decisions are often the most challenging pieces of legal guidance to understand. They are rarely straightforward and usually contain so much analysis that it becomes hard to get to the bottom of what was...more

Pullman & Comley - Connecticut Health Law

HHS Issues What May Be a Short-lived Final Rule Removing Certain Sex-Based Discrimination Protections

Pullman & Comley - Connecticut Health Law on

Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act prohibits health programs and activities that receive federal financial assistance from discriminating on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, age or disability. ...more

Snell & Wilmer

Supreme Court Holds Employers Cannot Discriminate Against LGBTQ Employees: Are Your Employee Benefit Plans Up to Snuff?

Snell & Wilmer on

On June 15, 2020, the United States Supreme Court issued a landmark opinion in Bostock v. Clayton County Georgia. At issue in Bostock was whether an employer could fire an employee for being gay or transgender without...more

10 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide