Timothy Stoltzfus Jost, J.D., is an Emeritus Professor at the Washington and Lee University School of Law. Jost is a member of the Institute of Medicine and a consumer liaison representative to the National Association of Insurance Commissioner. He is coauthor of a casebook, Health Law, used widely throughout the United States in teaching health law, and of a treatise and hornbook by the same name. He is also the author of Health Care at Risk: A Critique of the Consumer-Driven Movement; Health Care Coverage Determinations: An International Comparative Study; Disentitlement? The Threats Facing our Public Health Care Programs and a Rights-Based Response, and Readings in Comparative Health Law and Bioethics.

Jost is a contributing editor at Health Affairs and a frequent contributor to Health Affairs Blog. He has also written numerous articles and book chapters on health care regulation and comparative health law, including monographs on legal issues in health care reform for Georgetown’s O’Neill Center, the Fresh Thinking Project, the National Academy of Social Insurance and National Academy of Public Administration, and the New America Foundation and Urban Institute.

Recent Posts by Timothy Jost

Congressional Risk Corridor Payout Limits Spawning Legal Difficulties

Two lawsuits illustrate the legal difficulties for the administration created by Congress’ limiting of ACA “risk corridor” payments---made to insurers with high claims costs---to amounts contributed to the risk corridor program by insurers with low costs.

May 24, 2016Following the ACA

EEOC Rules Allow Significant Rewards, Penalties In Connection With Wellness Program Participation (Update)

New federal rules regarding the interaction of employer wellness programs with protections for people with disabilities and genetic information clarify the standards wellness programs must meet to be deemed voluntary.

Seeking Compromise, Supreme Court Remands Contraceptive Coverage Case To Lower Courts

On May 16, the Supreme Court sent Zubik v. Burwell back down to the lower courts in pursuit of a compromise regarding the accommodation of the religious objections of the petitioner nonprofit organizations to covering contraceptives under the Affordable Care Act’s preventive services mandate.

HHS Issues Health Equity Final Rule

HHS has issued a final rule implementing ACA section 1557, which prohibits discrimination based on race, color, national origin, sex, age, or disability by any health program or activity that receives federal funding or is administered by a federal agency or entity established under ACA Title I.

Judge Rules Against Administration In Cost-Sharing Reduction Payment Case

Federal district court judge Rosemary Collyer agreed with the House of Representatives that Congress has not appropriated funding to reimburse insurers for cost-sharing reduction payments. She stayed her decision pending appeal, but if upheld the holding could destabilize insurance markets.

CMS Acts On Special Enrollment Periods, CO-OPs (Updated)

On May 6, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services adopted an interim final rule that amends both requirements for special enrollment periods and regulations addressing board membership and other aspects of CO-OPs.

ACA Implementation Round-Up: Insurer Quality Ratings And More

Recent CMS actions implementing the ACA include the release of further details on the use of a quality rating system for qualified health plans in connection with the 2017 open enrollment period, the announcement of an employer coverage verification study, and more.

CMS Releases Revised Transparency Proposal For QHPs

On April 29, 2016, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services posted in the Federal Register and at its Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) website its final proposal for Transparency in Coverage Reporting for Qualified Health Plans

Medicaid Managed Care Final Rule: Examining The Alignment With Qualified Health Plan Requirements (Updated)

In the final Medicaid Managed Care (MMC) rule, CMS indicated a desire to align MMC requirements with those governing qualified health plans in the marketplaces. However, the regulations for the two programs vary in some cases, recognizing their differences.

Compromise Prospects Recede In Contraceptive Mandate High Court Litigation (Update)

Reply briefs filed April 20 in Zubik v. Burwell, the Supreme Court contraceptive mandate case, suggest that the parties remain far apart. Meanwhile, the federal government released FAQs on issues that have arisen under the ACA and the Mental Health Parity and Women’s Health and Cancer Rights Act.

April 21, 2016Following the ACA