Both sides in the case submitted a draft agreement to the court on Tuesday stipulating that the individual Texas businesses and workers that sued over the mandate should be shielded while the case makes its way through the courts, but that the rules should still apply to everyone else with employer-sponsored insurance and Obamacare’s individual market.

Disruptions to the insurance market could still be on the horizon.

The challengers, represented by Texas abortion ban architect Jonathan Mitchell, are seeking to strike down the preventive care mandate entirely, arguing that because the United States Preventive Services Task Force is made up of outside experts who were neither Senate-confirmed nor chosen by a Senate-confirmed agency head, their recommendations of what services should be covered by insurance must be “set aside” and can’t be enforced.

Their suit also claims the requirement for insurance to cover the pre-exposure prophylaxis pill used to prevent transmission of HIV — known as PrEP — violates the religious rights of the challengers. In their legal briefs, they equated covering the highly effective medication with encouraging homosexuality and promiscuity.

The 5th Circuit heard oral arguments on the case last week, and a ruling is expected in the coming months. An appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court is likely no matter which side prevails.

For now, however, the agreement supersedes Texas District Court Judge Reed O’Connor’s nationwide ruling from March striking down all of the decisions made by the United States Preventive Services Task Force since 2010 about what insurers must cover without cost sharing.