.jpeg)
In a significant legal development, a federal judge has temporarily halted President Joe Biden’s initiative to extend Affordable Care Act (ACA) healthcare coverage to individuals enrolled in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. Judge Daniel M. Traynor of the U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota issued the preliminary injunction and stay of the final rule on Monday.
The Biden administration announced the policy expansion in May, emphasizing its potential to provide health insurance to over 100,000 young people who were previously ineligible for ACA coverage. “The final rule will remove the prohibition on DACA recipients’ eligibility for Affordable Care Act coverage for the first time,” the administration stated at the time.
Background on DACA and the ACA Expansion
DACA, established by President Barack Obama in 2012, provides temporary relief from deportation, work authorization, and limited federal benefits to certain non-U.S. nationals who arrived in the country as children. However, until the Biden administration’s proposed rule change, DACA recipients were excluded from ACA healthcare marketplaces and benefits.
The administration argued that expanding ACA coverage to DACA recipients would address a significant gap in healthcare access, benefiting individuals who contribute to the U.S. economy and society. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated that about 110,000 DACA recipients would enroll in ACA coverage annually due to the rule, potentially rising to 140,000 if the expanded premium tax credit structure becomes permanent.
Legal Challenge from States
The final rule faced strong opposition from 19 states, including Texas, which filed a legal challenge arguing that it would strain state resources. The states’ motion stated that the rule would require “limited resources … of public assistance diverted to support unlawfully present aliens,” causing irreparable harm to state budgets and public systems.
In June, the CBO projected that the rule could increase the federal deficit by $7 billion over the 2025-2034 period, with an additional $2 billion increase if the premium tax credit structure is made permanent.
Judge Traynor’s Ruling and Reactions
Judge Traynor’s decision to issue a preliminary injunction effectively pauses the implementation of the ACA expansion for DACA recipients while the case proceeds. The ruling has drawn sharp criticism from immigrant advocacy groups.
The Home is Here Coalition condemned the decision, calling it a “shameful and callous ruling,” while the National Immigration Law Center described it as “both disappointing and wrong on the law.”
Proponents of the rule argue that providing healthcare access to DACA recipients is a moral imperative and a practical step to integrate these young individuals into the nation’s healthcare system.
Implications and Next Steps
The ruling affects more than 578,000 DACA recipients nationwide, according to the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). While the Biden administration considers its legal options, the case highlights the ongoing political and legal disputes surrounding DACA and immigration policy.
As the case unfolds, its outcome could have lasting implications for DACA recipients and the scope of healthcare policy under the ACA. For now, the preliminary injunction ensures that the final rule remains in limbo, leaving many DACA recipients uncertain about their healthcare options.
Broader Context
The debate over ACA coverage for DACA recipients underscores broader tensions surrounding immigration policy and federal benefits. The Biden administration’s approach marks a departure from previous restrictions, seeking to integrate DACA recipients into mainstream systems. However, opposition from states signals enduring resistance to expanding benefits to undocumented immigrants, even those with legal protections under DACA.
.jpeg&description=Federal Judge temporarily blocks Biden administration’s ACA expansion for DACA recipients){kind=link}