Skip to main content

No. 21-379October Term 2021Decided Mar 28, 2022

Docket 21-379October Term 2021 (2021–2022)

Texas v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

For now, the key issue is whether the Court will take up a challenge to preventive-care coverage rules tied to recommendations from outside expert bodies.

Case status

Current stage
Decided
Latest event
Decision released Mar 28, 2022
Case Accepted
Arguments
Decision ReleasedMar 28, 2022
What it's about

This case challenges the Affordable Care Act’s requirement that health plans cover certain preventive services without cost-sharing when those services are recommended by outside medical expert bodies. Texas argues that Congress and federal agencies unconstitutionally let private entities effectively set binding insurance-coverage rules, while the Fifth Circuit held that HHS kept enough control to avoid that problem.

Question presented

1. Whether an agency rule delegating rulemaking authority to a private entity violates the nondelegation doctrine. 2. Whether the statute of limitations applicable to a challenge to an agency rule that delegates rulemaking authority to a private entity starts to run when the agency delegates the authority or when the private entity exercises the delegated authority.

Case path

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit / Decision released Mar 28, 2022

Area

Administrative Law

Briefing

What it's about

Texas is asking the Supreme Court to review a fight over the Affordable Care Act's preventive-care coverage rule. The state says Congress and federal agencies let outside medical expert bodies effectively set binding insurance-coverage requirements, while the Fifth Circuit said HHS kept enough control to avoid that constitutional problem.

Vote

The case is pending and has not been scheduled for oral argument. Texas argues the rule unlawfully lets private entities shape binding coverage rules, while the Fifth Circuit said HHS kept enough control.

Impact

The dispute could affect whether insurers must cover some preventive services without cost-sharing when outside expert groups recommend them. That matters to patients, employers, insurers, and states that help pay for or regulate health coverage.

What's next

The next sign to watch is whether the Supreme Court schedules oral argument or makes another docket move. No decision window is available yet.

What is the core dispute in Texas v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue?

Texas says federal officials cannot let outside medical expert bodies effectively decide binding insurance-coverage rules. The Fifth Circuit said HHS kept enough control to avoid that problem.

What real-world consequences could this case have for health coverage?

The case could affect no-cost coverage for some preventive services recommended by outside expert groups. Patients, employers, insurers, and state regulators could all feel the impact.

What is the next procedural step to watch in this case?

Watch for the Supreme Court to schedule oral argument or make another docket move. The case has not been set for argument yet.

Decision

Decision record

What the Court decided

For now, the key issue is whether the Court will take up a challenge to preventive-care coverage rules tied to recommendations from outside expert bodies.

Impact

The dispute could affect whether insurers must cover some preventive services without cost-sharing when outside expert groups recommend them. That matters to patients, employers, insurers, and states that help pay for or regulate health coverage.

Not official Court text.

Opinion documents

Timing

Decided March 28, 2022

The Court released its decision on March 28, 2022 without hearing oral argument.