The host
Julie Rovner KFF Well being Information @jrovner
Julie Rovner is chief Washington correspondent and host of KFF Well being Information’ weekly well being coverage information podcast, “What the Well being?” A famous knowledgeable on well being coverage points, Julie is the creator of the critically praised reference guide “Well being Care Politics and Coverage A to Z,” now in its third version.
In what will definitely be remembered as a landmark choice, the Supreme Court docket’s conservative majority this week overruled a 40-year-old authorized precedent that required judges normally to yield to the experience of federal companies. It’s unclear how the elimination of what is referred to as the “Chevron deference” will have an effect on the day-to-day enterprise of the federal authorities, however the choice is already sending shockwaves via the policymaking neighborhood. Administrative consultants say it’ll dramatically change the way in which key well being companies, such because the FDA and the Facilities for Medicare & Medicaid Providers, do enterprise.
The Supreme Court docket additionally this week determined to not determine a case out of Idaho that centered on whether or not a federal well being regulation that requires hospitals to offer emergency care overrides the state’s near-total ban on abortion.
This week’s panelists are Julie Rovner of KFF Well being Information, Joanne Kenen of the Johns Hopkins colleges of public well being and nursing and Politico Journal, Victoria Knight of Axios, and Alice Miranda Ollstein of Politico.
Panelists
Among the many takeaways from this week’s episode:
- In 1984, the Supreme Court docket dominated broadly that courts ought to defer to the decision-making of federal companies when an ambiguous regulation is challenged. On Friday, the Supreme Court docket dominated that the courts, not federal companies, ought to have the ultimate say. The ruling will make it harder to implement federal legal guidelines — and attracts consideration to the truth that Congress, often and pointedly, leaves federal companies a lot of the job of turning written legal guidelines into actuality.
- That was hardly the one Supreme Court docket choice with main well being implications this week: On Thursday, the courtroom briefly restored entry to emergency abortions in Idaho. However as with its abortion-pill choice, it dominated on a technicality, with different, related instances within the wings — like one difficult Texas’ abortion ban.
- In separate rulings, the courtroom struck down a serious opioid settlement settlement, and it successfully allowed the federal authorities to petition social media corporations to take away falsehoods. Plus, the courtroom agreed to listen to a case subsequent time period on transgender well being look after minors.
- The primary general-election debate of the 2024 presidential cycle left abortion activists pissed off with their standard-bearers — on either side of the aisle. Opponents did not like that former President Donald Trump doubled down on his stance that abortion must be left to the states. And abortion rights supporters felt President Joe Biden didn’t forcefully rebut Trump’s outlandish falsehoods about abortion — and likewise didn’t take a powerful sufficient place on abortion rights himself.
Plus, for “further credit score,” the panelists recommend well being coverage tales they learn this week that they suppose you need to learn, too:
Julie Rovner: The Washington Submit’s “Masks Are Going From Mandated to Criminalized in Some States,” by Fenit Nirappil.
Victoria Knight: The New York Instances’ “The Opaque Trade Secretly Inflating Costs for Prescription Medication,” by Rebecca Robbins and Reed Abelson.
Joanne Kenen: The Washington Submit’s “Social Safety To Drop Out of date Jobs Used To Deny Incapacity Advantages,” by Lisa Rein.
Alice Miranda Ollstein: Politico’s “Opioid Deaths Rose 50 P.c In the course of the Pandemic. in These Locations, They Fell,” by Ruth Reader.
Additionally talked about on this week’s podcast:
- Politico’s “Contained in the $100 Million Plan To Restore Abortion Rights in America,” by Alice Miranda Ollstein.
- JAMA Community Open’s “Use of Oral and Emergency Contraceptives After the US Supreme Court docket’s Dobbs Resolution,” by Dima M. Qato, Rebecca Myerson, Andrew Shooshtari, et al.
- JAMA Well being Discussion board’s “Modifications in Everlasting Contraception Procedures Amongst Younger Adults Following the Dobbs Resolution,” by Jacqueline E. Ellison, Brittany L. Brown-Podgorski, and Jake R. Morgan.
- JAMA Pediatrics’ “Toddler Deaths After Texas’ 2021 Ban on Abortion in Early Being pregnant,” by Alison Gemmill, Claire E. Margerison, Elizabeth A. Stuart, et al.
Credit
- Francis Ying Audio producer
- Emmarie Huetteman Editor
|
|
