Resources

Client Alerts, News Articles, Blog Posts, & Multimedia

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

Chevron Doctrine No More: What the Supreme Court’s Ruling Means for Agency Authority

Client Alert

On June 28, 2024, the Supreme Court invalidated the Chevron doctrine, nearly 40 years after it first took effect.

The Chevron doctrine is a longstanding standard for decision-making that required Federal courts to defer to reasonable agency decisions where Federal law is silent or unclear. Though it historically garnered little attention, the doctrine had powerful practical effect, as it provided Federal agencies the power to publish necessary administrative rules interpreting vague or unclear Federal laws passed by Congress, essentially filling in the gaps left by Federal law. For areas of complicated Federal law like health care that require detailed knowledge and expertise, the ability of the pertinent regulatory agency to expound on Federal law served to facilitate the operations of Federal programs like Medicare and Medicaid.

In his majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts supported the end of Chevron based on its “misguided” presumption that federal agencies have competence to resolve statutory ambiguities. That competence rests with the Federal court system, not Federal agencies, according to Chief Justice Roberts.

Following the fall of Chevron, courts will not have to accept agency expertise in their review of challenged regulations, shifting from Federal agency expertise to generalist courts’ interpretations of Federal law.

In short, Friday’s ruling will likely impede the ability of Federal agencies to implement laws passed by Congress. Though agencies’ regulations will still have the force and effect of law, there will be a new incentive to challenge these rules in a court that will not have to afford deference to agency expertise where statutes are not clear. Overturning Federal regulations will result in barriers to implementing Federal programs.

For questions regarding how this decision could impact your business, please contact BMD Member Daphne Kackloudis at dlkackloudis@bmdllc.com or Attorney Jordan Burdick at jaburdick@bmdllc.com.


Supreme Court Upholds Coverage under the Affordable Care Act

The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld the authority of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force under the ACA, ensuring continued no-cost coverage for over 100 preventive health services. The decision impacts millions of Americans and preserves provider reimbursement through insurance.

Health Care Providers Take Note: Federal Budget Brings Medicaid and Staffing Rule Changes

The 2025 federal budget introduces significant changes for health care providers and Medicaid recipients, including new cost-sharing requirements, work eligibility mandates, rural health grants, and a pause on minimum staffing rules.

Key Healthcare Provisions in Ohio’s 2026–2027 Budget

Ohio’s newly enacted biennial budget (HB 96) for FY 2026–2027 brings sweeping changes for healthcare providers across the state. The law includes new Medicaid eligibility requirements, reporting mandates, funding directives, and social policy provisions. Several vetoes by Governor DeWine also affect healthcare-related initiatives.

Providers Beware: Court Sides with Insurers in No Surprises Act Arbitration

On June 12, 2025, the Fifth Circuit ruled in favor of Aetna and Kaiser in two lawsuits brought by air ambulance providers challenging how insurers calculated payments under the No Surprises Act’s Independent Dispute Resolution process. The court held that unless there is clear evidence of fraud or serious misconduct, IDR decisions will stand, reinforcing the finality of the arbitration process.

Introducing HB 281: Enforcement of Federal Immigration Laws in Ohio Hospitals

House Bill 281, introduced on May 20, 2025, would require Ohio hospitals to allow law enforcement, including federal immigration agents, to enter facilities and enforce immigration laws. The bill mandates that hospitals comply with information requests and adopt formal policies, raising significant concerns about patient privacy and access to care for immigrant communities.