JAMA Network October 14, 2021
Larry Levitt, MPP

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) envisioned a seamless system of health coverage. All people who are poor and near poor would be covered by Medicaid, and those with incomes above that who do not have access to employer-provided health benefits could buy private insurance in the ACA marketplace with subsidies to help make it more affordable.

The Supreme Court had other ideas.

In the 2012 decision that upheld the constitutionality of the requirement to get insured or pay a tax penalty—which has since been repealed—the court threw a curveball (or, maybe more aptly, a knuckleball) on Medicaid. It ruled that states could not be required to expand Medicaid to everyone with incomes up to 138% of the poverty level (currently...

Today's Sponsors

LEK
ZeOmega

Today's Sponsor

LEK

 
Topics: ACA (Affordable Care Act), Equity/SDOH, Govt Agencies, Healthcare System, Insurance, Medicaid, Patient / Consumer, Provider
New federal rule establishes minimum staffing levels for nursing homes
Unsheltered People Are Losing Medicaid in Redetermination Mix-Ups
Fact Sheet: Vice President Harris Announces Historic Advancements in Long-Term Care to Support the Care Economy
Home Care Industry Slams Finalized 80-20 Rule, Warns Agency Closures Are Coming
What The ‘Fundamentally Contradicting’ Medicaid Access Rule Includes

Share This Article