BREAKING: SCOTUS rules 6-3 HHS task force’s guidance stems from presidential authority

According to the opinion, the court ruled that the "Task Force members are inferior officers whose appointment by the Secretary of HHS is consistent with the Appointments Clause." The plaintiffs in the case had brought a challenge to the appointments stemming from a religious objection to the "requirement that insurers provide coverage for a drug that prevents the transmission of HIV," per SCOTUS blog.

Plaintiffs did not want to be forced to implement guidance from the taskforce, claiming that the task force did not have authority to determine what must be covered under employer sponsored healthcare plans. The plaintiffs argued that because the task force heads were not appointed by the president, they did not have that authority. However, the court ruled that because those members are within the chain of command—they must answer to the HHS secretary who answers to the president—their authority was permissible.

The decision was decided 6 to 3, with Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch dissenting. The majority opinion was written by Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

The opinion stated that the Appointments Clause of Article II says that "Principal officers must be appointed by the President 'with the Advice and Consent of the Senate.'" Inferior officers need not be confirmed by the Senate after being appointed by the president or the executive branch's "principal officers."

SCOUTUS ruled, "Task Force members are inferior officers because their work is 'directed and supervised' by the Secretary of HHS, a principal officer, through two main sources of authority."

The case was originally brought against the Biden administration's HHS, however, the Trump administration continued the case in its appeal to the Supreme Court, arguing that HHS has the power to fire task for members as well as reject recommendations, which is allowed when the task force members are deemed inferior officers.