#appealed — Public Fediverse posts

The case of #JanaGonani, a #trans #woman in #Malawi, could have profound implications for the nation's anti-LGBTIQ laws. Gonani was convicted under #PenalCode #Section153(c) for an "#unnaturaloffence" in December 2021, receiving an eight-year #prison #sentence. She has since #appealed the #judgment, #challenging the #PenalCode's #provisions that #criminalize such #offenses.

— (1/4)

Judge's Decision Would Make Some No-Cost Cancer Screenings a Thing of the Past - Scientific American

A federal judge on Thursday #overturned a portion of the Affordable Care Act that makes #preventive #services, such as some #cancer #screenings, #free to enrollees, a decision that could affect health insurance policyholders nationwide.

The decision from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas could open the door for insurers or employers to #reinstate #copayments for some of those preventive services, although many may be reluctant or unable to do so, at least immediately.

The ruling by U.S. District #Judge #Reed #OConnor builds on a September judgment in which he also said the ACA requirement that employers cover preexposure prophylaxis treatment to prevent HIV violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

His ruling is the latest shot in the legal battle over the ACA. “Previous cases threatened the very existence of the law and fundamental protections. This decision does not do that,” said Larry Levitt, KFF executive vice president for health policy. But “it strikes down a portion of the law, albeit a very popular one, that is used by a lot of people.”

It is almost certain to be #appealed, possibly by both sides: the conservative groups that brought the case and had hoped the decision would be broader, and the Biden administration, which supports the #ACA.

https://khn.org/news/article/braidwood-becerra-aca-preventive-services-court-decision-reed-oconnor/

Judge's Decision Would Make Some No-Cost Cancer Screenings a Thing of the Past - Scientific American

A federal judge on Thursday #overturned a portion of the Affordable Care Act that makes #preventive #services, such as some #cancer #screenings, #free to enrollees, a decision that could affect health insurance policyholders nationwide.

The decision from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas could open the door for insurers or employers to #reinstate #copayments for some of those preventive services, although many may be reluctant or unable to do so, at least immediately.

The ruling by U.S. District #Judge #Reed #OConnor builds on a September judgment in which he also said the ACA requirement that employers cover preexposure prophylaxis treatment to prevent HIV violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

His ruling is the latest shot in the legal battle over the ACA. “Previous cases threatened the very existence of the law and fundamental protections. This decision does not do that,” said Larry Levitt, KFF executive vice president for health policy. But “it strikes down a portion of the law, albeit a very popular one, that is used by a lot of people.”

It is almost certain to be #appealed, possibly by both sides: the conservative groups that brought the case and had hoped the decision would be broader, and the Biden administration, which supports the #ACA.

https://khn.org/news/article/braidwood-becerra-aca-preventive-services-court-decision-reed-oconnor/

Judge's Decision Would Make Some No-Cost Cancer Screenings a Thing of the Past - Scientific American

A federal judge on Thursday #overturned a portion of the Affordable Care Act that makes #preventive #services, such as some #cancer #screenings, #free to enrollees, a decision that could affect health insurance policyholders nationwide.

The decision from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas could open the door for insurers or employers to #reinstate #copayments for some of those preventive services, although many may be reluctant or unable to do so, at least immediately.

The ruling by U.S. District #Judge #Reed #OConnor builds on a September judgment in which he also said the ACA requirement that employers cover preexposure prophylaxis treatment to prevent HIV violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

His ruling is the latest shot in the legal battle over the ACA. “Previous cases threatened the very existence of the law and fundamental protections. This decision does not do that,” said Larry Levitt, KFF executive vice president for health policy. But “it strikes down a portion of the law, albeit a very popular one, that is used by a lot of people.”

It is almost certain to be #appealed, possibly by both sides: the conservative groups that brought the case and had hoped the decision would be broader, and the Biden administration, which supports the #ACA.

https://khn.org/news/article/braidwood-becerra-aca-preventive-services-court-decision-reed-oconnor/

Judge's Decision Would Make Some No-Cost Cancer Screenings a Thing of the Past - Scientific American

A federal judge on Thursday #overturned a portion of the Affordable Care Act that makes #preventive #services, such as some #cancer #screenings, #free to enrollees, a decision that could affect health insurance policyholders nationwide.

The decision from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas could open the door for insurers or employers to #reinstate #copayments for some of those preventive services, although many may be reluctant or unable to do so, at least immediately.

The ruling by U.S. District #Judge #Reed #OConnor builds on a September judgment in which he also said the ACA requirement that employers cover preexposure prophylaxis treatment to prevent HIV violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

His ruling is the latest shot in the legal battle over the ACA. “Previous cases threatened the very existence of the law and fundamental protections. This decision does not do that,” said Larry Levitt, KFF executive vice president for health policy. But “it strikes down a portion of the law, albeit a very popular one, that is used by a lot of people.”

It is almost certain to be #appealed, possibly by both sides: the conservative groups that brought the case and had hoped the decision would be broader, and the Biden administration, which supports the #ACA.

https://khn.org/news/article/braidwood-becerra-aca-preventive-services-court-decision-reed-oconnor/

Judge's Decision Would Make Some No-Cost Cancer Screenings a Thing of the Past - Scientific American

A federal judge on Thursday #overturned a portion of the Affordable Care Act that makes #preventive #services, such as some #cancer #screenings, #free to enrollees, a decision that could affect health insurance policyholders nationwide.

The decision from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas could open the door for insurers or employers to #reinstate #copayments for some of those preventive services, although many may be reluctant or unable to do so, at least immediately.

The ruling by U.S. District #Judge #Reed #OConnor builds on a September judgment in which he also said the ACA requirement that employers cover preexposure prophylaxis treatment to prevent HIV violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

His ruling is the latest shot in the legal battle over the ACA. “Previous cases threatened the very existence of the law and fundamental protections. This decision does not do that,” said Larry Levitt, KFF executive vice president for health policy. But “it strikes down a portion of the law, albeit a very popular one, that is used by a lot of people.”

It is almost certain to be #appealed, possibly by both sides: the conservative groups that brought the case and had hoped the decision would be broader, and the Biden administration, which supports the #ACA.

https://khn.org/news/article/braidwood-becerra-aca-preventive-services-court-decision-reed-oconnor/

Analysis: Abortion pill access may be endangered by this 19th century law

The Wild West of the post-Roe v. Wade legal landscape is focused on a lone federal judge in Amarillo, Texas, who could use a 19th century law to limit access to abortion medication for every American woman.

The judge, 45-year-old #Matthew #Kacsmaryk, held a hearing Wednesday about whether he should impose a preliminary injunction that would require the US Food and Drug Administration to withdraw or suspend its approval of the drug, #mifepristone, while a larger case progresses.

Mifepristone is taken along with another drug, #misoprostol, as part of the two-step #medication #abortion process.

Misoprostol can be prescribed on its own, but it is considered less effective.

Kacsmaryk, who sounded open to the idea of restricting access to mifepristone, will have to agree with some or all of these general points raised if he decides to issue an injunction:

* That doctors who don’t perform abortions and live in Texas, where abortions are already banned, are harmed by abortions conducted elsewhere

* That a single federal judge in Amarillo should do what no federal judge has ever done and unilaterally rescind an FDA approval.

* That a drug, which studies suggest is on par with ibuprofen in terms of safety, is actually so harmful it should be reconsidered by the FDA.

CNN’s Tierney Sneed wrote a longer list of takeaways from the hearing, where anti-abortion rights doctors and activist groups teed up their lawsuit in Kacsmaryk’s courtroom to further limit access to abortion care in the US.

It’s important to note that no matter what Kacsmaryk does, it will be #appealed up through the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals and potentially to the Supreme Court.

But perhaps the most incredible question Kacsmaryk faces is whether an #1870s #chastity #law named for an anti-vice crusader, #Anthony #Comstock, should be resuscitated and applied to the medicine that now accounts for a majority of US abortions.

Comstock operated the New York Society for the Suppression of Vice and was a special agent of the US Postal Service. He was known for seizing contraband like contraceptives and condoms in the name of rooting out obscenity, according to the New York Historical Society.

Mary Ziegler, a law professor at the University of California, Davis who has written about the Comstock Act for CNN Opinion, described Comstock as being “obsessed by what he saw as the decaying morals of a country preoccupied with sex.”

Ziegler writes:

The law he inspired #barred not just the #mailing of “#obscene #books” but also #birth #control and #abortion #drugs and #devices.

In the 19th and early 20th centuries, the #Comstock #Act was used to prohibit the mailing of many literary classics, from Geoffrey Chaucer’s “The Canterbury Tales” to works by James Joyce and Walt Whitman

https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/16/politics/mifepristone-abortion-pill-what-matters/index.html