The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has postponed a July 10 in-person meeting of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, the 16-member panel that determines which screenings, vaccines and other preventive services must be covered by insurers at no out-of-pocket cost under the Affordable Care Act. An email from Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s office informed members that the session would not take place, without providing a reason.

Read more

Advocates and health care workers in Massachusetts have expressed concerns that a bill proposed by the Trump administration could dismantle the state's health care safety net, which was established as a model under the Obama-era health overhaul. Massachusetts, known for its successful implementation of Obamacare's framework, has a program that provides insurance coverage, preventive care, and access to lifesaving medications. The proposed legislation has raised fears that these protections and benefits could be undermined, potentially unraveling the health care safety net that many residents rely on.

At least 17 million Americans are projected to lose health insurance coverage if the Republican tax and spending cuts plan, backed by former President Donald Trump, becomes law. The legislation would reverse key provisions of the Affordable Care Act, undermining years of progress in expanding health care access. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that nearly 12 million people could lose Medicaid coverage by 2034 under the Senate-passed version of the bill. The GOP budget bill is expected to have widespread downstream effects on the U.S.

health care system, including significant Medicaid cuts that would also impact hospitals. Lawmakers have called for a small number of Republican senators to oppose the bill to prevent these outcomes. The bill has already passed the House, raising concerns about the future of health coverage for millions of Americans.

Barclays initiated coverage of Oscar Health Inc. with an Underweight rating and a $17 price target, arguing that investors are overestimating the health-insurance technology firm’s ability to expand profitability over the coming years. Analyst Andrew Mok highlighted policy risks and likely margin pressure that could offset benefits from recent premium increases and technology investments.

The bank’s bearish stance contrasts with Oscar Health’s projections unveiled at its June 2024 investor day, where newly appointed Chief Executive Officer Mark Bertolini outlined a path to earnings of at least $2.25 per share in 2027. The strategy calls for roughly 500 basis points of margin expansion through medical-loss-ratio improvements and administrative cost reductions. Barclays contends the targets leave little room for error and present asymmetric downside relative to consensus expectations.

Several Democratic mayors and medical groups have filed lawsuits challenging new rules introduced by the Trump administration that shorten the enrollment period for the Affordable Care Act (ACA) health insurance coverage. These changes reduce the timeframe available for millions of Americans to sign up for Obamacare, prompting legal action from cities and healthcare organizations concerned about access to coverage. The lawsuits argue that the administration's restrictions come at a time when more Americans are expected to rely on Medicaid and marketplace plans for health insurance.

Former UFC fighter and Olympic wrestler Ben Askren has undergone a successful double lung transplant after a month-long battle with severe pneumonia that left him on a ventilator and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support. His wife, Amy Askren, said in a 30 June statement that doctors completed the life-saving surgery in Wisconsin and that the family is “forever thankful to the donor and his family.”

Read more

The U.S. Supreme Court ended its 2024-25 term on Friday with a series of decisions that delivered sweeping victories to President Donald Trump, punctuating a week in which the administration prevailed in every major case before the justices.

The term’s most consequential opinion, decided 6–3 along ideological lines, restricts federal district courts from issuing nationwide injunctions. Writing for the majority, Justice Amy Coney Barrett said such broad orders "likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has given to federal courts." The case stemmed from litigation over Trump’s effort to limit birth-right citizenship; the decision leaves the merits of that policy to lower courts but sharply narrows a legal tool long used to halt presidential actions.

Read more

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld a central pillar of the Affordable Care Act, ruling 6–3 that members of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force are constitutionally appointed “inferior officers.” The decision in Kennedy v. Braidwood Management reverses a lower-court finding that had threatened insurers’ obligation to provide no-cost preventive care, including cancer screenings, vaccinations and HIV-prevention medication.

Read more

Former UFC fighter Ben Askren has been battling a severe case of pneumonia since mid-June 2025, which led to his hospitalization in Wisconsin. Throughout his illness, Askren remained on a ventilator and was evaluated for a potential lung transplant due to damage caused by the infection, including a hole in his lung. His wife, Amy Askren, provided regular updates, confirming that he experienced periods of awareness but had not fully regained consciousness. Despite initial misinformation about his condition, it was clarified that Askren remained hospitalized and was being comforted by family.

In late June, infections were reported to be under control, and Askren was officially placed on the lung transplant waiting list. The lung transplant surgery, which could cost up to $2 million and was initially denied by his insurance, was funded by a donor. On June 30, 2025, Amy Askren announced that Ben Askren successfully underwent a double lung transplant. The family expressed gratitude to the donor and their family, and Askren is now on the road to recovery. The MMA community and former fighters, including Dana White and Jake Paul, have publicly supported Askren during his health crisis.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on June 20, 2025, in Stanley v. City of Sanford, Florida, that a retired firefighter with Parkinson's disease cannot pursue a lawsuit under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) regarding the rollback of her post-employment health benefits. The Court held that the ADA's protections apply only to current employees or applicants who can fulfill their job duties, excluding retirees from bringing such discrimination claims against former employers.

This decision clarifies that retirees lack the legal basis to sue under the ADA for denial of benefits after leaving their jobs. However, the Court did not entirely foreclose the possibility of discrimination claims related to post-employment benefits through other legal avenues. The ruling has implications for how disability discrimination claims are handled in the context of post-retirement benefits and employment law enforcement.

Oscar Health Inc. shares rallied as much as 16% on Friday, propelling the health-insurance technology firm through a key chart level near $18 and sparking a wave of speculative trading. The advance followed two days of heightened activity in the options market, underscoring intensifying retail interest in momentum stocks.

About 223,000 call contracts changed hands during the session, eclipsing Wednesday’s then-record 152,000, according to exchange data cited by traders. The most active strike was the June 22 call, with roughly 6,700 lots traded—more than triple existing open interest—and driving implied volatility roughly nine percentage points higher to about 93%.

Read more

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on June 20, 2025, in Stanley v. City of Sanford, Florida, that a retired firefighter with Parkinson's disease cannot sue her former employer under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) for discrimination related to a reduction in post-employment health benefits. The Court held that the ADA's protections apply only to current employees who can perform their job duties, and therefore do not extend to retirees seeking to challenge changes to benefits after leaving employment.

This decision effectively bars retirees from bringing ADA claims based on post-employment benefit alterations. However, the Court did not entirely foreclose the possibility of discrimination claims over post-employment benefits, leaving open alternative legal avenues. The ruling clarifies that the ADA does not cover discrimination against individuals who have left the workforce, impacting how employers may modify retiree benefits going forward.

The U.S. Supreme Court issued two notable rulings related to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in June 2025. In a unanimous 9-0 decision, the Court ruled that students with disabilities in public schools do not have to meet a higher standard of proof to pursue discrimination claims under the ADA compared to other settings. This ruling was made in favor of a Minnesota teenage girl with a rare form of epilepsy who sued her school district for failing to provide adequate accommodations, such as instruction outside school hours.

The decision is expected to make it easier for families of children with disabilities to sue schools over access to education and disability discrimination. The Court emphasized that disabled students should not be held to a higher burden of proof than other individuals with disabilities and that intent to discriminate need not be proven to recover damages in such cases. Separately, the Supreme Court ruled against a retired Florida firefighter with Parkinson's disease who sought to sue her former employer under the ADA for limiting a health-insurance subsidy post-retirement. The Court held that ADA protections do not extend to retirees for post-employment benefits claims, reasoning that the law covers only those who can still fulfill their job duties. This ruling narrows the scope of ADA claims related to post-employment benefits but does not entirely foreclose discrimination claims in this area. Together, these decisions clarify and shape the application of the ADA in education and employment contexts, particularly regarding the standards of proof and eligibility for claims.

The U.S. Supreme Court said Monday it will review an appeal by First Choice Women’s Resource Center, a network of faith-based crisis pregnancy clinics, that seeks to block a subpoena issued by New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin. The subpoena, part of an investigation into whether the centers misled women by implying they provided abortion referrals, demands donor lists and other internal documents. The Third Circuit had dismissed the center’s federal lawsuit, but the high court’s decision to grant certiorari puts the scope of states’ investigative powers and the First Amendment rights of anti-abortion organizations on next term’s docket.

In a separate unsigned order, the justices directed New York courts to reconsider a 2017 state rule that requires employer-sponsored health insurance plans to cover medically necessary abortions. The Catholic Diocese of Albany and other religious groups contend the mandate violates constitutional protections for religious exercise. While the Supreme Court did not strike down the regulation, its grant-vacate-remand order revives the diocese’s challenge and signals continued scrutiny of state measures that collide with religious objections to abortion.

The California Legislature has approved a proposal to freeze enrollment in a state-funded health care program for immigrants without legal status. The vote, held on June 13, 2025, aims to address a $12 billion state budget deficit. Under the new measures, undocumented immigrants who are already enrolled in the program will be required to pay a monthly premium of $30. This policy change has sparked political debate, with Republican lawmakers and Governor Jared Polis clashing over the provision of Medicaid benefits to undocumented immigrants. The freeze affects new applicants, preventing some migrants from accessing state-funded health insurance programs such as Medi-Cal.

The average cost of health insurance plans has increased by €480 over the past two years, reaching nearly €2,000. This rise in premiums coincides with a surge in the number of people undergoing procedures in private hospitals. The increase follows multiple premium hikes in 2023 and 2024, which already pushed average costs well above €600. As a result of these rising costs, there has been a 46% decline in health insurance purchases over just two quarters, raising concerns that higher premiums are pricing many consumers out of the market. In the United States, approximately 24 million people are also experiencing challenges related to health insurance affordability.

Spanish actor Sergio Peris-Mencheta revealed that his leukemia treatment in the United States cost five million dollars. He credited having the best possible insurance for covering the expense. Following a bone marrow transplant, Peris-Mencheta emphasized the high cost of medical care in the U.S. and contrasted it with the public healthcare system in Spain. He urged greater appreciation for Spain's public health services, highlighting that many people do not realize the value of accessible and affordable care, including routine services such as ambulance rides and vaccinations.

A recent poll by the Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF) reveals that approximately 45% of adults enrolled in health plans through the Affordable Care Act (ACA) marketplaces identify as Republicans, including supporters of former President Donald Trump. This marks a shift in the political composition of ACA enrollees, with more Republicans than Democrats now using marketplace coverage. The Republican Party is currently considering cuts to ACA subsidies, which could result in higher premiums and reduced coverage for many, including about 24 million Americans who rely on these marketplaces. Analysts warn that such policy changes may have adverse effects on Republican constituents who depend on ACA coverage, potentially impacting the party's political standing.

The Trump administration and Congressional Republicans have proposed a fiscal year 2026 budget bill that includes substantial cuts to food assistance and health programs both domestically and internationally. The bill aims to reduce funding for hospital services, food assistance programs, and health insurance, while providing tax breaks for billionaires. Key programs targeted include the Food for Peace initiative, which annually purchases about $2 billion worth of food from American farmers to support impoverished countries, and global health programs such as PEPFAR, which faces a proposed $400 million funding cut. These reductions threaten the operations of aid organizations like MANA Nutrition, which has fed 10 million children worldwide since 2010, and Edesia Nutrition, which relies on the Food for Peace program. Critics argue that these cuts will adversely affect struggling American families, malnourished children, and individuals suffering from illnesses like HIV/AIDS, while benefiting wealthy individuals. The budget bill has faced widespread opposition from Democrats and some bipartisan advocates who call for full funding of vital food and health aid programs.

Following the Dobbs decision, abortion access in the United States has been reshaped significantly, with the expansion of abortion pill distribution networks emerging as a major development. However, the recently proposed budget bill led by former President Donald Trump includes several provisions that critics say undermine abortion access nationwide. These provisions include defunding Planned Parenthood, which is expected to reduce health care services broadly, and a measure that prohibits health plans on the Affordable Care Act (ACA) marketplace from offering abortion coverage. This latter provision effectively creates a national abortion ban by restricting access even in states where abortion remains legal. Additionally, the budget targets federal health care funding for states that protect abortion rights, such as New Jersey, Connecticut, and Massachusetts, by attempting to strip ACA funds from these states. Democratic lawmakers have condemned these measures as attempts to impose a backdoor national abortion ban and are actively opposing the budget bill to protect reproductive freedom.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has postponed a July 10 in-person meeting of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, the 16-member panel that determines which screenings, vaccines and other preventive services must be covered by insurers at no out-of-pocket cost under the Affordable Care Act. An email from Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s office informed members that the session would not take place, without providing a reason.

Read more

Advocates and health care workers in Massachusetts have expressed concerns that a bill proposed by the Trump administration could dismantle the state's health care safety net, which was established as a model under the Obama-era health overhaul. Massachusetts, known for its successful implementation of Obamacare's framework, has a program that provides insurance coverage, preventive care, and access to lifesaving medications. The proposed legislation has raised fears that these protections and benefits could be undermined, potentially unraveling the health care safety net that many residents rely on.

At least 17 million Americans are projected to lose health insurance coverage if the Republican tax and spending cuts plan, backed by former President Donald Trump, becomes law. The legislation would reverse key provisions of the Affordable Care Act, undermining years of progress in expanding health care access. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that nearly 12 million people could lose Medicaid coverage by 2034 under the Senate-passed version of the bill. The GOP budget bill is expected to have widespread downstream effects on the U.S.

health care system, including significant Medicaid cuts that would also impact hospitals. Lawmakers have called for a small number of Republican senators to oppose the bill to prevent these outcomes. The bill has already passed the House, raising concerns about the future of health coverage for millions of Americans.

Barclays initiated coverage of Oscar Health Inc. with an Underweight rating and a $17 price target, arguing that investors are overestimating the health-insurance technology firm’s ability to expand profitability over the coming years. Analyst Andrew Mok highlighted policy risks and likely margin pressure that could offset benefits from recent premium increases and technology investments.

The bank’s bearish stance contrasts with Oscar Health’s projections unveiled at its June 2024 investor day, where newly appointed Chief Executive Officer Mark Bertolini outlined a path to earnings of at least $2.25 per share in 2027. The strategy calls for roughly 500 basis points of margin expansion through medical-loss-ratio improvements and administrative cost reductions. Barclays contends the targets leave little room for error and present asymmetric downside relative to consensus expectations.

Several Democratic mayors and medical groups have filed lawsuits challenging new rules introduced by the Trump administration that shorten the enrollment period for the Affordable Care Act (ACA) health insurance coverage. These changes reduce the timeframe available for millions of Americans to sign up for Obamacare, prompting legal action from cities and healthcare organizations concerned about access to coverage. The lawsuits argue that the administration's restrictions come at a time when more Americans are expected to rely on Medicaid and marketplace plans for health insurance.

Former UFC fighter and Olympic wrestler Ben Askren has undergone a successful double lung transplant after a month-long battle with severe pneumonia that left him on a ventilator and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support. His wife, Amy Askren, said in a 30 June statement that doctors completed the life-saving surgery in Wisconsin and that the family is “forever thankful to the donor and his family.”

Read more

The U.S. Supreme Court ended its 2024-25 term on Friday with a series of decisions that delivered sweeping victories to President Donald Trump, punctuating a week in which the administration prevailed in every major case before the justices.

The term’s most consequential opinion, decided 6–3 along ideological lines, restricts federal district courts from issuing nationwide injunctions. Writing for the majority, Justice Amy Coney Barrett said such broad orders "likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has given to federal courts." The case stemmed from litigation over Trump’s effort to limit birth-right citizenship; the decision leaves the merits of that policy to lower courts but sharply narrows a legal tool long used to halt presidential actions.

Read more

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld a central pillar of the Affordable Care Act, ruling 6–3 that members of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force are constitutionally appointed “inferior officers.” The decision in Kennedy v. Braidwood Management reverses a lower-court finding that had threatened insurers’ obligation to provide no-cost preventive care, including cancer screenings, vaccinations and HIV-prevention medication.

Read more

Former UFC fighter Ben Askren has been battling a severe case of pneumonia since mid-June 2025, which led to his hospitalization in Wisconsin. Throughout his illness, Askren remained on a ventilator and was evaluated for a potential lung transplant due to damage caused by the infection, including a hole in his lung. His wife, Amy Askren, provided regular updates, confirming that he experienced periods of awareness but had not fully regained consciousness. Despite initial misinformation about his condition, it was clarified that Askren remained hospitalized and was being comforted by family.

In late June, infections were reported to be under control, and Askren was officially placed on the lung transplant waiting list. The lung transplant surgery, which could cost up to $2 million and was initially denied by his insurance, was funded by a donor. On June 30, 2025, Amy Askren announced that Ben Askren successfully underwent a double lung transplant. The family expressed gratitude to the donor and their family, and Askren is now on the road to recovery. The MMA community and former fighters, including Dana White and Jake Paul, have publicly supported Askren during his health crisis.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on June 20, 2025, in Stanley v. City of Sanford, Florida, that a retired firefighter with Parkinson's disease cannot pursue a lawsuit under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) regarding the rollback of her post-employment health benefits. The Court held that the ADA's protections apply only to current employees or applicants who can fulfill their job duties, excluding retirees from bringing such discrimination claims against former employers.

This decision clarifies that retirees lack the legal basis to sue under the ADA for denial of benefits after leaving their jobs. However, the Court did not entirely foreclose the possibility of discrimination claims related to post-employment benefits through other legal avenues. The ruling has implications for how disability discrimination claims are handled in the context of post-retirement benefits and employment law enforcement.

Oscar Health Inc. shares rallied as much as 16% on Friday, propelling the health-insurance technology firm through a key chart level near $18 and sparking a wave of speculative trading. The advance followed two days of heightened activity in the options market, underscoring intensifying retail interest in momentum stocks.

About 223,000 call contracts changed hands during the session, eclipsing Wednesday’s then-record 152,000, according to exchange data cited by traders. The most active strike was the June 22 call, with roughly 6,700 lots traded—more than triple existing open interest—and driving implied volatility roughly nine percentage points higher to about 93%.

Read more

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on June 20, 2025, in Stanley v. City of Sanford, Florida, that a retired firefighter with Parkinson's disease cannot sue her former employer under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) for discrimination related to a reduction in post-employment health benefits. The Court held that the ADA's protections apply only to current employees who can perform their job duties, and therefore do not extend to retirees seeking to challenge changes to benefits after leaving employment.

This decision effectively bars retirees from bringing ADA claims based on post-employment benefit alterations. However, the Court did not entirely foreclose the possibility of discrimination claims over post-employment benefits, leaving open alternative legal avenues. The ruling clarifies that the ADA does not cover discrimination against individuals who have left the workforce, impacting how employers may modify retiree benefits going forward.

The U.S. Supreme Court issued two notable rulings related to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in June 2025. In a unanimous 9-0 decision, the Court ruled that students with disabilities in public schools do not have to meet a higher standard of proof to pursue discrimination claims under the ADA compared to other settings. This ruling was made in favor of a Minnesota teenage girl with a rare form of epilepsy who sued her school district for failing to provide adequate accommodations, such as instruction outside school hours.

The decision is expected to make it easier for families of children with disabilities to sue schools over access to education and disability discrimination. The Court emphasized that disabled students should not be held to a higher burden of proof than other individuals with disabilities and that intent to discriminate need not be proven to recover damages in such cases. Separately, the Supreme Court ruled against a retired Florida firefighter with Parkinson's disease who sought to sue her former employer under the ADA for limiting a health-insurance subsidy post-retirement. The Court held that ADA protections do not extend to retirees for post-employment benefits claims, reasoning that the law covers only those who can still fulfill their job duties. This ruling narrows the scope of ADA claims related to post-employment benefits but does not entirely foreclose discrimination claims in this area. Together, these decisions clarify and shape the application of the ADA in education and employment contexts, particularly regarding the standards of proof and eligibility for claims.

The U.S. Supreme Court said Monday it will review an appeal by First Choice Women’s Resource Center, a network of faith-based crisis pregnancy clinics, that seeks to block a subpoena issued by New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin. The subpoena, part of an investigation into whether the centers misled women by implying they provided abortion referrals, demands donor lists and other internal documents. The Third Circuit had dismissed the center’s federal lawsuit, but the high court’s decision to grant certiorari puts the scope of states’ investigative powers and the First Amendment rights of anti-abortion organizations on next term’s docket.

In a separate unsigned order, the justices directed New York courts to reconsider a 2017 state rule that requires employer-sponsored health insurance plans to cover medically necessary abortions. The Catholic Diocese of Albany and other religious groups contend the mandate violates constitutional protections for religious exercise. While the Supreme Court did not strike down the regulation, its grant-vacate-remand order revives the diocese’s challenge and signals continued scrutiny of state measures that collide with religious objections to abortion.

The California Legislature has approved a proposal to freeze enrollment in a state-funded health care program for immigrants without legal status. The vote, held on June 13, 2025, aims to address a $12 billion state budget deficit. Under the new measures, undocumented immigrants who are already enrolled in the program will be required to pay a monthly premium of $30. This policy change has sparked political debate, with Republican lawmakers and Governor Jared Polis clashing over the provision of Medicaid benefits to undocumented immigrants. The freeze affects new applicants, preventing some migrants from accessing state-funded health insurance programs such as Medi-Cal.

The average cost of health insurance plans has increased by €480 over the past two years, reaching nearly €2,000. This rise in premiums coincides with a surge in the number of people undergoing procedures in private hospitals. The increase follows multiple premium hikes in 2023 and 2024, which already pushed average costs well above €600. As a result of these rising costs, there has been a 46% decline in health insurance purchases over just two quarters, raising concerns that higher premiums are pricing many consumers out of the market. In the United States, approximately 24 million people are also experiencing challenges related to health insurance affordability.

Spanish actor Sergio Peris-Mencheta revealed that his leukemia treatment in the United States cost five million dollars. He credited having the best possible insurance for covering the expense. Following a bone marrow transplant, Peris-Mencheta emphasized the high cost of medical care in the U.S. and contrasted it with the public healthcare system in Spain. He urged greater appreciation for Spain's public health services, highlighting that many people do not realize the value of accessible and affordable care, including routine services such as ambulance rides and vaccinations.

A recent poll by the Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF) reveals that approximately 45% of adults enrolled in health plans through the Affordable Care Act (ACA) marketplaces identify as Republicans, including supporters of former President Donald Trump. This marks a shift in the political composition of ACA enrollees, with more Republicans than Democrats now using marketplace coverage. The Republican Party is currently considering cuts to ACA subsidies, which could result in higher premiums and reduced coverage for many, including about 24 million Americans who rely on these marketplaces. Analysts warn that such policy changes may have adverse effects on Republican constituents who depend on ACA coverage, potentially impacting the party's political standing.

The Trump administration and Congressional Republicans have proposed a fiscal year 2026 budget bill that includes substantial cuts to food assistance and health programs both domestically and internationally. The bill aims to reduce funding for hospital services, food assistance programs, and health insurance, while providing tax breaks for billionaires. Key programs targeted include the Food for Peace initiative, which annually purchases about $2 billion worth of food from American farmers to support impoverished countries, and global health programs such as PEPFAR, which faces a proposed $400 million funding cut. These reductions threaten the operations of aid organizations like MANA Nutrition, which has fed 10 million children worldwide since 2010, and Edesia Nutrition, which relies on the Food for Peace program. Critics argue that these cuts will adversely affect struggling American families, malnourished children, and individuals suffering from illnesses like HIV/AIDS, while benefiting wealthy individuals. The budget bill has faced widespread opposition from Democrats and some bipartisan advocates who call for full funding of vital food and health aid programs.

Following the Dobbs decision, abortion access in the United States has been reshaped significantly, with the expansion of abortion pill distribution networks emerging as a major development. However, the recently proposed budget bill led by former President Donald Trump includes several provisions that critics say undermine abortion access nationwide. These provisions include defunding Planned Parenthood, which is expected to reduce health care services broadly, and a measure that prohibits health plans on the Affordable Care Act (ACA) marketplace from offering abortion coverage. This latter provision effectively creates a national abortion ban by restricting access even in states where abortion remains legal. Additionally, the budget targets federal health care funding for states that protect abortion rights, such as New Jersey, Connecticut, and Massachusetts, by attempting to strip ACA funds from these states. Democratic lawmakers have condemned these measures as attempts to impose a backdoor national abortion ban and are actively opposing the budget bill to protect reproductive freedom.