Community - Faculty - Anu Dairkee Profile
Anu Dairkee (JD ’23) is a Health Law and Policy Clinical Fellow at Harvard Law School’s Center for Health Law & Policy Innovation.
Alumni Profile Anu Dairkee
Fellow advocate
Anu Dairkee (JD ’23) makes the case for good health policies in her Harvard Law fellowship
Anu Dairkee (JD ’23) earned an MD before coming to Loyola to study health law. Now she is midway through a prestigious, two-year post as one of just three Health Law and Policy Clinical Fellows at Harvard Law School’s Center for Health Law & Policy Innovation.
Describe your work at the center.
The center does research and analyzes decisions and policies that come out on a federal level or a state level to assess the impact they’ve had on different patient populations. We then publish papers in the mainstream press and professional journals to inform people and drive advocacy in those areas. The other key part of our work is developing tools for advocacy organizations to use to help inform their constituents. The work we do for them also helps them advocate for changes in health care at the state and federal levels.
Can you give an example of your work?
I co-wrote a paper being published this year in the American Journal of Law and Medicine. The paper explores the implications of Braidwood v. Becerra, an ongoing case out of Texas that is challenging the Affordable Care Act’s preventive care mandate, which requires free of cost coverage of certain preventive care services for most privately insured individuals. The case was heard by the Fifth Circuit on appeal and has now been remanded back to the District Court in Texas. The fear for many advocates who support free preventive care was that the Fifth Circuit would uphold the decision of the District Court in Texas, which struck down no-cost coverage of certain preventive care services on constitutional grounds and ruled that a nationwide injunction was the proper remedy. Instead, the Fifth upheld the ruling that the preventive services mandate is unconstitutional but held that a nationwide injunction was not the appropriate remedy due to procedural issues. The Fifth Circuit has remanded the case back to the Texas District Court with a roadmap as to how to properly bring the case in a way that a nationwide injunction would be possible.
“Loyola’s health law program is absolutely phenomenal.”
Why is no-cost preventive care important?
This is not just a health law lawyers issue; it’s an every-American issue. If we take ourselves back to pre-March 2010, when the preventive care mandate of the ACA took effect, anyone with insurance had to pay a co-pay for every doctor’s visit. For a lot of people, even a co-pay of $10 or $25 will stop them from going to the doctor. By making it free, you get people to the doctor earlier, which leads to better health care overall as well as easier treatments and better outcomes for people who get a diagnosis.
Did Loyola help position you for the fellowship?
Oh yes! First, Loyola’s health law program is absolutely phenomenal. I was able to interview really effectively—to speak intelligently about health law in a way that I think surprised interviewers, coming from a new graduate. Also, [director of Loyola’s Health Justice Project] Kate Mitchell, one of my mentors, sent me the [fellowship] job description and reviewed my application. Without that encouragement, I wouldn’t have even applied. —Liz Miller (July 2024)
Anu Dairkee (JD ’23) earned an MD before coming to Loyola to study health law. Now she is midway through a prestigious, two-year post as one of just three Health Law and Policy Clinical Fellows at Harvard Law School’s Center for Health Law & Policy Innovation.
Describe your work at the center.
The center does research and analyzes decisions and policies that come out on a federal level or a state level to assess the impact they’ve had on different patient populations. We then publish papers in the mainstream press and professional journals to inform people and drive advocacy in those areas. The other key part of our work is developing tools for advocacy organizations to use to help inform their constituents. The work we do for them also helps them advocate for changes in health care at the state and federal levels.
Can you give an example of your work?
I co-wrote a paper being published this year in the American Journal of Law and Medicine. The paper explores the implications of Braidwood v. Becerra, an ongoing case out of Texas that is challenging the Affordable Care Act’s preventive care mandate, which requires free of cost coverage of certain preventive care services for most privately insured individuals. The case was heard by the Fifth Circuit on appeal and has now been remanded back to the District Court in Texas. The fear for many advocates who support free preventive care was that the Fifth Circuit would uphold the decision of the District Court in Texas, which struck down no-cost coverage of certain preventive care services on constitutional grounds and ruled that a nationwide injunction was the proper remedy. Instead, the Fifth upheld the ruling that the preventive services mandate is unconstitutional but held that a nationwide injunction was not the appropriate remedy due to procedural issues. The Fifth Circuit has remanded the case back to the Texas District Court with a roadmap as to how to properly bring the case in a way that a nationwide injunction would be possible.
Why is no-cost preventive care important?
This is not just a health law lawyers issue; it’s an every-American issue. If we take ourselves back to pre-March 2010, when the preventive care mandate of the ACA took effect, anyone with insurance had to pay a co-pay for every doctor’s visit. For a lot of people, even a co-pay of $10 or $25 will stop them from going to the doctor. By making it free, you get people to the doctor earlier, which leads to better health care overall as well as easier treatments and better outcomes for people who get a diagnosis.
Did Loyola help position you for the fellowship?
Oh yes! First, Loyola’s health law program is absolutely phenomenal. I was able to interview really effectively—to speak intelligently about health law in a way that I think surprised interviewers, coming from a new graduate. Also, [director of Loyola’s Health Justice Project] Kate Mitchell, one of my mentors, sent me the [fellowship] job description and reviewed my application. Without that encouragement, I wouldn’t have even applied. —Liz Miller (July 2024)