Resources

Client Alerts, News Articles, Blog Posts, & Multimedia

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

Ohio Appellate Court Rules in Favor of Gender-Affirming Care

Client Alert

On Tuesday, March 18, 2025, the 10th District Court of Appeals in Franklin County ruled that House Bill (HB) 68’s restrictions on the provision of puberty blockers and hormones to minors seeking gender-affirming care violates the Health Care Freedom Amendment to the Ohio Constitution and therefore, are not enforceable in Ohio.

According to the 10th District, banning prescription drugs (including puberty blockers and hormones) interferes with parents’ rights to care for their children and prohibits parents from accessing for their minor children and deciding on medical treatment that follows the standards of care and professional guidelines accepted in the medical community to treat gender-related conditions.

The case, Moe v. Yost, has been remanded back to the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas. Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost has explicitly indicated that his office will appeal the ruling.

HB 68 became effective in August 2024 and broadly, prevents minors from accessing gender-affirming care (including hormone blockers, hormone replacement therapy (HRT), and some mental health services) without first being assessed for other comorbidities, including depression, anxiety, ADHD, and autism spectrum disorder, as well as for signs of physical, sexual, mental, or emotional abuse, and other traumas.

BMD previously drafted a client alert on HB 68, available here.

If you have any questions regarding this ruling, or HB 68 generally, please contact BMD Healthcare Member Daphne Kackloudis at dlkackloudis@bmdllc.com or Attorney Jordan Burdick at jaburdick@bmdllc.com.


New Ohio Reporting Requirements for Non-Residential Contractors

Ohio’s E-Verify Workforce Integrity Act, effective March 19, 2026, requires all nonresidential construction companies, subcontractors, and labor brokers to use E-Verify to confirm employee work eligibility on projects across the state. The law applies regardless of company size and carries financial penalties and potential restrictions on future state contracts for noncompliance. Some uncertainty remains around requirements for existing employees, making early compliance planning important.

DOT Non-Domiciled CDL Rule

A new rule from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) will significantly narrow eligibility for non-domiciled Commercial Driver’s Licenses (CDLs) beginning March 16, 2026. The rule limits eligibility to holders of H-2A, H-2B, and E-2 visas and eliminates Employment Authorization Documents (EADs) as qualifying proof of work authorization. As a result, many lawfully present and work-authorized immigrants, including refugees, asylees, DACA recipients, and Temporary Protected Status holders, will no longer be able to obtain or renew a non-domiciled CDL. The change is expected to affect roughly 194,000 drivers nationwide and has prompted multiple legal challenges, including a pending emergency stay request before the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

FinCEN Residential Real Estate Reporting Rule Now in Effect

FinCEN’s new Residential Real Estate Reporting Rule, effective March 1, 2026, requires certain real estate transfers to be reported to combat financial crimes. Transfers of residential property to entities or trusts without financing may require a Real Estate Report.

Department of Education Proposes Redefinition of “Professional Degree,” Excluding Nursing and Limiting Graduate Loan Borrowing

The U.S. Department of Education has issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would redefine “professional degree” programs under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The proposal excludes nursing from the recognized list and would impose new borrowing limits for graduate students while eliminating the Grad PLUS program. Public comments are due by March 2, 2026.

First-of-Its-Kind Federal Ruling Finds Use of Consumer AI Tool May Destroy Attorney-Client Privilege

On February 10, 2026, Judge Jed Rakoff of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York issued a first-of-its-kind ruling finding that documents generated by a criminal defendant using a consumer AI platform were not protected by attorney-client privilege after being shared with counsel. The court treated the AI tool as a third party, concluding that entering sensitive information into a publicly available platform may waive confidentiality. The ruling also suggests that the work product doctrine may not apply where AI-generated materials are created independently by a client rather than at counsel’s direction. The decision signals that parties should exercise caution when using consumer AI tools in connection with legal matters.