On April 22, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Kennedy v. Braidwood (formerly Braidwood v. Becerra), a case that could reshape preventive care coverage under the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The central legal question is whether the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF)—whose recommendations form the basis of the ACA’s preventive services mandate—was properly established under the Constitution’s Appointments Clause.
A transcript and audio recording of the arguments are available on the Court’s website.
Over 90 minutes, all nine Justices explored complex legal issues, including whether USPSTF members are considered “principal officers” requiring Senate confirmation, or “inferior officers” who may be appointed by the HHS Secretary. The Justices also examined whether the USPSTF’s statutory independence limits the Secretary’s authority to approve or oversee its work.
A decision is expected by late June or early July. However, the Court may remand portions of the case back to lower courts for further consideration, meaning litigation could continue even after a ruling is issued.
Why This Matters in Colorado
The outcome of Braidwood could affect how preventive services—such as cancer screenings, statins, and PrEP—are required to be covered by health plans without cost sharing under federal law. In response to this uncertainty, Colorado lawmakers introduced SB25-196, which would codify many of the ACA’s preventive service coverage requirements into state statute.
As this legislation moves through the Colorado General Assembly, the pending Supreme Court decision will play a key role in shaping how states like Colorado navigate the balance between federal mandates and state-level benefit design.
CAHP will continue to monitor the outcome of the Braidwood case and its intersection with state policy developments, including SB25-196. We remain committed to ensuring that any changes to preventive care coverage in Colorado support both access and long-term affordability.
