Future Retirement Success
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Stocks
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Stocks

Future Retirement Success

Investing

Officers Who Make Final Decisions for the Government Must Receive Senate Confirmation

by April 18, 2025
April 18, 2025
Officers Who Make Final Decisions for the Government Must Receive Senate Confirmation

Thomas A. Berry and Charles Brandt

Braidwood Management is a small business that offers a self-insured health plan to around 70 employees. But under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), Braidwood is forced to cover “preventive services” that are mandated by the US Preventive Services Task Force (the Task Force), no matter how onerous. Braidwood says this is unconstitutional.

The Task Force is a bureaucratic entity run by expert doctors who were originally appointed by an official ranking below the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS). HHS recently purported to change the rules so that Task Force members are now appointed by the HHS secretary. Either way, the ACA empowers the Task Force to issue rules that compel employers to cover various “preventive services” without patient “cost-sharing,” i.e., without copays. Once the Task Force makes a coverage “recommendation,” that determination is, for all practical purposes, binding on private insurers. While the HHS Secretary may delay the date of any such rule taking effect for up to one year, neither he nor the president may review or modify the Task Force’s mandates. What the Task Force says, goes.

Braidwood sued the government, challenging this scheme as unconstitutional. Among other things, Braidwood argued that the Task Force violates Article II’s Appointments Clause because its members are “principal officers” who have not been validly appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. The district court largely agreed with Braidwood, and the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed. Now the case is at the Supreme Court.

Cato has filed an amicus brief asking the Supreme Court to affirm the Fifth Circuit. In our brief, we advance two main arguments for why the Task Force, in its current configuration, violates the Appointments Clause.

First, Task Force members are principal officers of the United States who must be appointed by the president with Senate consent. Under the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Arthrex (2021), an officer is “principal” (as opposed to inferior) when that officer is empowered to make final, unreviewable decisions binding on private citizens. Because Task Force recommendations are binding on private insurers and unreviewable by a higher-ranking executive officer answerable to the president, Task Force members are principal officers whose present mode of appointment by the HHS Secretary is unlawful.

Second, even if Task Force members are inferior officers, their appointment nonetheless violates the Appointments Clause. The Constitution only allows “inferior officers” to be exempted from Senate confirmation if Congress explicitly makes that choice “by Law.” But the scheme for appointing Task Force members is set out by administrative regulation, not by statute. That means Congress never decided to vest such appointment “by Law” in the HHS Secretary. And in the absence of such a congressional choice, even “inferior” officers must be confirmed by the Senate. The appointment of Task Force members thus violates the Appointments Clause, regardless of whether they are inferior or principal officers of the United States.

The Supreme Court should affirm the Fifth Circuit and declare that members of the Task Force must be nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate.

0
FacebookTwitterGoogle +Pinterest
previous post
Friday Feature: Chance Academy
next post
This is the Group to Watch for the Next Bull Market Phase and Separating Noise from Reality

You may also like

New Study Shows Decriminalization Did Not Cause Spike...

September 6, 2024

Argentina’s Paradigm Shift

November 21, 2023

Jack Dorsey on Why Social Media’s Future Should...

May 21, 2024

Western Muslims, LGBT Rights, and Free Speech

April 28, 2023

Did the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act Pay...

July 31, 2024

School Choice Madness: How I Picked My Teams

March 21, 2025

Deeper Than ‘Banning’: Possible Liberal Bias Detected in...

October 17, 2023

Inflation Is Still Trending in the Right Direction

March 15, 2024

The SEC as ‘Everything Regulator’ Strikes Again

February 2, 2024

A New Podcast with Peter Van Doren

May 3, 2023

    Get free access to all of the retirement secrets and income strategies from our experts! or Join The Exclusive Subscription Today And Get the Premium Articles Acess for Free

    By opting in you agree to receive emails from us and our affiliates. Your information is secure and your privacy is protected.

    Recent Posts

    • Trump orders Attorney General to investigate Biden’s autopen use amid cognitive decline concerns

      June 5, 2025
    • Elon Musk warpath against Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill’ rattles House GOP

      June 4, 2025
    • Durbin obstruction threat chills Senate as Trump nominees hang in balance

      June 4, 2025
    • Elon Musk posts ‘Kill Bill’ meme in latest push to nix Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill’

      June 4, 2025
    • Why ADX Can Mislead You — And How to Avoid It

      June 4, 2025
    • S&P 500 on the Verge of 6,000: What’s at Stake?

      June 4, 2025

    Categories

    • Business (8,143)
    • Investing (2,006)
    • Politics (15,519)
    • Stocks (3,127)
    • About us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms & Conditions

    Disclaimer: futureretirementsuccess.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively “The Company”) do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

    Copyright © 2025 futureretirementsuccess.com | All Rights Reserved