Oregon v. Azar

Juvenile Law Center and 29 other advocacy organizations joined amicus briefs filed by National Health Law Program in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in three separate but related cases: Oregon v. Azar, California v. Azar, and Washington v. Azar. 

In each brief, Amici urged the Court to affirm the trial courts’ preliminary injunctions against regulations which would undermine the Affordable Care Act. Amici argued that the predictable result of the regulations would be that health care providers would be unable to accept Title X funds, causing care sites to close. These cutbacks would fall disproportionately on individuals who face significant health disparities. There would be serious consequences for adolescents, and the health of other underserved groups—including people of color, people in rural areas, and those living with disabilities—would be negatively affected.

The Ninth Circuit vacated the preliminary injunctions, holding that the final rule at issue contains a reasonable interpretation of Title X, does not violate the Affordable Care Act, and is not arbitrary and capricious. In dissent, Circuit Judge Paez stated “[t]he consequences [of this decision] will be borne by the millions of [people] who turn to Title X-funded clinics for lifesaving care.”