For now, ‘Dreamers’ will be shut out of the health care marketplace…
BISMARCK, N.D. – Young adult immigrants known as “Dreamers” in 19 U.S. states will be temporarily blocked from obtaining health insurance through the Affordable Care Act’s public marketplace, following a ruling from a federal judge. This decision represents a setback for efforts by the Biden administration to assist immigrants who were brought to the country illegally as children.
Judge Daniel Traynor of the U.S. District Court in North Dakota issued the order, which restricts an initiative that was projected to enable approximately 147,000 immigrants to enroll for coverage. This ruling arose from a lawsuit linked to the policy, and it will remain effective until the case is resolved in court.
The ruling specifically impacts immigrants in 19 states where Republican attorneys general filed lawsuits against the new policy. Their claims centered on concerns that immigrants may qualify for public subsidies available to many individuals enrolled under the ACA.
State officials argued that the rule established earlier this year would incentivize immigrants to stay in the U.S. unlawfully, potentially resulting in financial burdens for states. They contended that both the Affordable Care Act and a 1996 law prevent U.S. government benefits from being granted to immigrants living in the country illegally. The “Dreamers” are considered part of a program that designates them as a low priority for deportation.
In his ruling, Traynor asserted that access to subsidized coverage is a compelling motivation for individuals to remain in the U.S. illegally, and he expressed concern that this could create significant financial ramifications for the states.
While federal law grants the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) the authority to determine an individual’s legal presence in the U.S., Traynor indicated that this power does not extend to bypassing congressional authority or altering the definition of “lawfully present.”
CMS stated that it is currently reviewing the lawsuit but refrained from commenting further on ongoing litigation.
Advocacy groups like the National Immigration Law Center have expressed their disappointment regarding the ruling. They highlighted that many “Dreamers” have been waiting for over a decade to access essential health coverage through the ACA, and they will continue to challenge this decision in court.
On the other hand, Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach hailed the decision as a triumph for law enforcement. He remarked that the Biden administration attempted to redefine what it means to legally reside in the U.S. through executive action, labeling the new rule as nonsensical.
North Dakota Attorney General Drew Wrigley underscored that American taxpayers, through Congress, set the parameters for how the federal government addresses the status of immigrants who are living unlawfully in the U.S. He stressed that while the policies may not always be perceived as benevolent, they are crucial in relation to healthcare accessibility, costs, and the burden on U.S. taxpayers.
Kansas and North Dakota spearheaded the lawsuit filed in August, supported by additional states including Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Ohio, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia.
Statements from various state attorneys general reflected their views on the ruling as part of a broader pushback against perceived overreach from the federal government regarding immigration policies.
