Supreme Court Reviews Key Cases Impacting U.S. Healthcare and Civil Rights
As the U.S. Supreme Court term concludes, several impactful cases addressing healthcare access, voting rights, birthright citizenship, and educational policies are under review, with Connecticut actively involved through submitted briefs. Notably, Attorney General Tong has participated in cases challenging administrative orders and lower court rulings that affect constitutional rights and federal protections.
The case Trump v. New Jersey challenges an executive order targeting birthright citizenship, questioning the constitutionality of altering rights established by the Fourteenth Amendment and the legitimacy of nationwide injunctions issued by district courts. This case highlights the ongoing legal debate about the scope of executive power and states' capacity to contest federal orders. In Kennedy v. Braidwood Management, Inc., the Supreme Court is considering the enforcement of Affordable Care Act provisions that guarantee preventive healthcare without cost-sharing, a critical policy measure aimed at reducing financial barriers to screenings and care for millions of Americans. This case underscores the legal scrutiny over federal healthcare mandates and their impact on insurance coverage.
The litigation extends to voting rights with Louisiana v. Callais, where the Supreme Court must resolve conflicts arising from congressional redistricting that involves allegations of racial gerrymandering and compliance with the Voting Rights Act.
This case illustrates the tension between state legislative actions and federal mandates designed to protect minority voting power. Additionally, cases addressing access to gender-affirming medical care for youth and challenges to LGBTQ+ inclusive educational materials are also before the Court. These disputes involve constitutional considerations relating to equal protection and the balance between parental rights and public school policies. Attorney generals nationwide, including Connecticut's, have submitted amicus briefs articulating the implications for public health, education, and civil rights compliance. The Court's decisions in these cases will have extensive regulatory and compliance implications for insurers, healthcare providers, educational institutions, and state governments nationwide, impacting policy enforcement and legal precedents across sectors.