SCOTUS Rulings May Change Employers’ Legal, Health Plan Strategies

On June 27, the Supreme Court issued two decisions that could have a significant impact on how employers navigate federal policies — both in terms of legal challenges and health plan requirements. The rulings in Trump v. CASA de Maryland and Kennedy v. Braidwood Management deal with how lawsuits can be used to block federal policies and how preventive care requirements under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) are structured. Both decisions have direct implications for employer compliance and long-term planning.

In Trump v. CASA Inc., the court considered whether federal judges can issue nationwide injunctions — orders that block a federal policy for everyone, even if only a few plaintiffs are involved in the case. In a 6-3 decision along ideological lines, the Supreme Court said these broad injunctions likely go beyond what federal courts are allowed to do under the Judiciary Act of 1789. The high court didn’t weigh in on the underlying policy at issue (a Trump  order related to birthright citizenship), but it did narrow the scope of the lower court’s injunction. Moving forward, the justices said that injunctions should apply only to the people or groups who are directly part of a lawsuit. For employers, this could mean that legal challenges to federal rules may no longer apply nationwide, making legal outcomes more uneven depending on where a case is filed.

In Kennedy v. Braidwood Management, the Supreme Court addressed a challenge to the ACA’s preventive care mandate that questioned whether the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) — which recommends services that must be covered at no cost — was lawfully formed. The case asked whether Congress had properly authorized the secretary of Health and Human Services to appoint members to the USPSTF. In another 6-3 ruling — this time with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh joining Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson, Elena Kagan, and Sonia Sotomayor — the Supreme Court upheld the current system.

Together, these rulings show how the court is shifting the legal landscape by limiting how broadly courts can block federal rules, while also affirming the structure of key agency-led processes such as the ACA’s preventive care mandate. For HR and compliance professionals, this reinforces the need to closely monitor ongoing legal developments, understand how regional rulings could affect national policies, and stay proactive in adapting benefits and compliance strategies.