A federal judge in North Dakota has dealt a blow to the Biden administration’s attempt to extend healthcare coverage to “Dreamers,” sparking a fierce debate on immigration and healthcare policy.
At a Glance
- Federal court blocks Biden’s policy to extend ACA coverage to DACA recipients in 19 states
- Judge rules HHS likely exceeded its statutory authority in redefining “lawfully present”
- Decision prevents 147,000 potential beneficiaries from accessing subsidized health insurance
- Ruling highlights ongoing legal and policy debates at the intersection of immigration and healthcare
Court Halts Biden’s Healthcare Expansion for Dreamers
In a significant setback for the Biden administration’s immigration and healthcare policies, a federal judge in North Dakota has temporarily blocked an attempt to extend federally subsidized health insurance to undocumented immigrants who arrived in the US as children, commonly known as “Dreamers.” The ruling, which affects 19 states, has ignited a fierce debate over the rights of DACA recipients and the limits of executive power in shaping healthcare policy.
The policy in question involved a final rule by the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) that aimed to extend Affordable Care Act (ACA) coverage to Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients. This move would have redefined the term “lawfully present” under the ACA, potentially making an additional 147,000 people eligible for subsidized health insurance.
A federal judge in North Dakota has rejected a Biden administration policy to allow immigrants who came to the U.S. illegally as children — known as "Dreamers" — to enroll for healthcare through the Affordable Care Act, known as "Obamacare." https://t.co/zFQyumki04
— NEWSMAX (@NEWSMAX) December 10, 2024
Judge’s Ruling: A Matter of Statutory Authority
Judge Daniel M. Traynor of the US District Court for the District of North Dakota issued the order, arguing that HHS likely exceeded its statutory authority. In his ruling, Judge Traynor emphasized that the ACA does not permit federal healthcare subsidies for individuals unlawfully present in the United States.
“As it currently stands, the ACA does not allow federal healthcare subsidies or coverage for aliens who are unlawfully present in the United States,” the judge wrote.
The judge’s decision prevents HHS from enforcing the rule in the 19 states involved in the lawsuit, including Kansas, North Dakota, Florida, and Texas. This ruling underscores the ongoing legal challenges faced by the Biden administration in its efforts to expand healthcare access and reform immigration policies.
Implications and Reactions
The court’s decision has sparked strong reactions from both sides of the political aisle. Supporters of the ruling argue that it upholds the rule of law and prevents the executive branch from overstepping its authority. Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach, who led the lawsuit, praised the decision, stating:
“This decision is a big win for the rule of law. Congress never intended that illegal aliens should receive Obamacare benefits. Indeed, two laws prohibit them from receiving such benefits. The Biden administration tried to break those laws. But we fought back and defeated the Biden Justice Department.”
On the other hand, proponents of the Biden administration’s policy argue that extending healthcare coverage to DACA recipients is a matter of basic human rights and public health. They contend that providing access to preventive care and treatment for this vulnerable population would ultimately benefit the entire healthcare system and society at large.
