View this email in your browser [ [link removed] ] .

American Dental Education Association


Volume 3, No. 90, July 16, 2025

U.S. Supreme Court Approves Mass Firings at Federal Agencies, Including HHS
 
The Supreme Court has allowed the Trump administration to move forward with its plans to significantly reduce the federal workforce and restructure several federal agencies, including the departments of Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, State and Treasury. This decision [ [link removed] ] , issued as an unsigned emergency order, lifted a previous lower court block and could result in tens of thousands of job losses.
 
Although the Supreme Court’s ruling is technically temporary, it effectively enables the administration to act while legal challenges are still ongoing. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented strongly, warning that the decision undermines lower courts and could lead to the dismantling of much of the federal government as established by Congress.
 
The administration plans to begin further layoffs and reorganizations immediately.
 
The legal battle began after President Trump issued an executive order in February directing agencies to prepare for large-scale staff cuts and structural changes.
In response, labor unions, advocacy organizations and local governments filed lawsuits challenging the order’s legality. U.S. District Judge Susan Illston temporarily blocked the layoffs, in early May, and later extended the halt, arguing that such sweeping changes required congressional approval.
She emphasized that while presidents can pursue new policy directions, significant reorganizations of federal agencies must involve Congress.
 
Despite the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upholding Illston’s ruling, the Trump administration sought emergency relief from the Supreme Court.
Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued that the president should not need explicit statutory approval for internal executive branch personnel decisions.
The challengers, however, maintained that Trump’s actions violated the separation of powers and broke with over a century of precedent where presidents sought congressional authorization for major government reorganizations.

 
Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that she agreed with the Court’s decision, but added that “the [reorganization] plans themselves are not before this Court, at this stage, and we thus have no occasion to consider whether they can and will be carried out consistent with the constraints of law. I join the Court’s stay because it leaves the District Court free to consider those questions in the first instance.” This implies that there will be further litigation on this matter.

U.S. Supreme Court Upholds ACA Preventive Services Provision
 
One of the major decisions handed down at the end of the U.S. Supreme Court’s most recent term was the Court’s decision in the Kennedy v. Braidwood Management [ [link removed] ] case. In a 6-3 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a key provision of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which mandates that insurance companies provide certain preventive health services at no cost to the insured.
 
Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh authored the majority opinion that confirmed the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, which determines which preventive services must be covered, is constitutionally valid. This decision secures access to essential preventive care for Americans, covering services such as screenings for cancer and diabetes, heart disease medications and pediatric dental care.
 
At the heart of the current dispute was the authority and role of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, an expert medical panel within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The Task Force plays a critical role in identifying which preventive services must be offered for free, ensuring consistent and science-based health coverage under the ACA.
The legal challenge questioned whether the Task Force members (who are appointed by the HHS secretary), should be classified as “principal officers,” (requiring presidential appointment and Senate confirmation) due to their independence in making health care recommendations.
However, the Court ruled that the members are “inferior officers” because their actions are subject to oversight and reversal by the HHS secretary, who also has the authority to remove them—thus upholding the current appointment process.
 
The ruling was supported by both conservative and liberal justices, including Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson.
 
Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Neil M. Gorsuch dissented.

Calgary Adds Fluoride Back to Community Water
 
While some states and local water supplies have been removing fluoride from their community water, one city in Alberta, Canada, has made the decision to add it back [ [link removed] ] . Calgary’s city council removed fluoride in 2011 after deciding the cost to replace the infrastructure used to process fluoride outweighed the benefits, but during the city’s time without fluoride, researchers discovered significant differences in tooth decay [ [link removed] ] among children when compared to a neighboring city that continued to add fluoride to its water.

 
In 2021, the city held a nonbinding vote among residents asking if fluoride should be added back to the city’s water supply. Sixty-two percent of residents supported the initiative, and on June 30, fluoride was added back to Calgary’s water supply.

Georgia Makes Dentists Eligible for Preceptor Tax Credit
 
Legislation [ [link removed] ] in Georgia that makes dentists eligible for the state’s preceptor tax credit took effect in July.
Under the bill, dentists who provide uncompensated community-based training to a dental student matriculating in a training program in Georgia are eligible for a tax credit of $1,000 for each preceptorship rotation completed in a calendar year.
The tax credit is also available to medical professionals who provide preceptor training to medical students, advanced practice registered nurse students and physician assistant students.
The aggregate amount of tax credits allowed is prohibited from exceeding $6 million for any calendar year.

California to Cut Dental Benefits for Immigrants Enrolled in Medicaid Starting July 2026
 
The recently signed California budget preserves dental benefits [ [link removed] ] for immigrants enrolled in Medicaid through July 2026; after that, the benefit is slated to be cut.
Facing a budget shortfall, [ [link removed] ] Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) and state legislators reached an agreement to freeze enrollment of undocumented immigrants in the state’s Medicaid program, charge adult immigrant enrollees a $30-per-month premium and cut dental benefits in 2026.

Register to Virtually Attend the Reagan-Udall Foundation for the FDA’s Public Meeting on Orally Ingestible Fluoride
 
Fluoride drops and tablets have been used since the 1940s to prevent cavities in kids without access to fluoridated water. Although still prescribed, these products were never officially approved by the FDA. Now, due to new research and their use in young children, the FDA is reviewing their safety.
 
Please see the link below to register to virtually attend the Reagan-Udall Foundation for the FDA’s Hybrid Public Meeting on the “Use of Orally Ingestible Unapproved Prescription Drug Products Containing Fluoride in the Pediatric Population"
 
The meeting will take place on Wednesday, July 23 from 9:30 a.m. – 4:00 p.m.
 
Register here. [ [link removed] ]

ADEA Advocacy in Action
This appears weekly in the ADEA Advocate to summarize and provide direct links to recent advocacy actions taken by ADEA. Please let us know what you think and how we might improve its usefulness.
 
Issues and Resources
 • ADEA report [ [link removed] ] on teledentistry
 • ADEA report [ [link removed] ] on the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on U.S. Dental Schools
 • ADEA policy brief [ [link removed] ] regarding overprescription of antibiotics
 • For a full list of ADEA memos, briefs and letters click here [ [link removed] ] .

Key Federal Issues [ [link removed] ]

ADEA U.S. Interactive Legislative and Regulatory Tracking Map [ [link removed] ]

Key State Issues [ [link removed] ]

The ADEA Advocate [ [link removed] ] is published weekly. Its purpose is to keep ADEA members abreast of federal and state issues and events of interest to the academic dentistry and the dental and research communities.
 
©2025
American Dental Education Association
655 K Street, NW, Suite 800
Washington, DC 20001
Tel: 202-289-7201
Website: www.adea.org [ [link removed] ]

Subscribe
[link removed][0]&p_colname=p_last_nm&p_varname=p_val_arr[1]&p_colname=p_alias&p_varname=p_val_arr[2]&p_colname=p_login_id&p_varname=p_val_arr[3]&p_colname=p_passwd&p_context=NEWSLETTER&p_success_url=censsaindprofile.section_update%3Fp_profile_ty%3DINDIVIDUAL_PROFILE%26p_skip_confirm_fl%3DY%26p_section_nm%3DNewsletters%26p_format%3D110%26p_msg_txt%3D%26p_cust_id%3D%26p_referrer%3D

Unsubscribe
[link removed]

B. Timothy Leeth, CPA
ADEA Chief Advocacy Officer
 
Bridgette DeHart, J.D.
ADEA Director of Federal Relations and Advocacy
 
Phillip Mauller, M.P.S.
ADEA Senior Director of State Relations and Advocacy
 
Contact Us:
[email protected] [ mailto:[email protected] ]

Powered by Higher Logic [link removed]