A federal judge in Texas has ruled that mandatory coverage under the Affordable Care Act for drugs that combat the transmission of HIV violates the religious freedom of a Christian employer.
U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor issued the ruling last week in a lawsuit led by Jonathan Mitchell, a former Texas solicitor general and a conservative activist, on behalf of Braidwood Management Inc.
The mandate was part of the Affordable Care Act and required employers to provide insurance plans that cover HIV-prevention pills known as PrEP drugs. Plaintiff argued that the requirement was incompatible with the employer’s religious beliefs.
O’Connor’s decision is the latest in a series legal challenges to Obamacare provisions. Although the judge had previously ruled the entire health care package unconstitutional last year, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the law in a 7-2 vote.
This was the third time that the High Court had intervened in a legal matter.
PrEP, which stands to prevent pre-exposure, was approved in 2012 by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. It is currently being used by hundreds and thousands of Americans.
Braidwood Management Inc., a Christian for-profit company, argued against covering the costs of such drugs, saying they “facilitate and encourage homosexual behavior and sexual activity outside of marriage between one man and one woman.”
In the lawsuit, it was also claimed that the mandate encouraged “homosexual behavior, prostitution, sexual promiscuity, and intravenous drug use.”
“This decision is deeply disappointing and could cripple HIV prevention efforts, particularly among communities of color and communities of poverty,”TheNational Minority AIDS Councilsaid in a statement.
Mitchell was the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit. He is also the architect of Texas’ six-week restrictive abortion ban. This ban allows private citizens to sue medical providers and recipients who violate the ban.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services didn’t say whether it would appeal the latest ruling. Biden administration indicated that they are reviewing the Texas decision.