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
March 19, 2025

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.

Health LawHealthcareHealth Care Freedom AmendmentDaphne KackloudisJordan Burdick
Client Alert

A Shift in Coverage: HHS Reinterprets “Federal Public Benefit” Under PRWORA

July 16, 2025The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services rescinded a 1998 interpretation of “federal public benefit” used in the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) on July 10, 2025. This notice removes "outdating exclusions" and includes additional programs under “federal public benefit."Client Alert

Supreme Court Upholds Coverage under the Affordable Care Act

July 10, 2025The 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.Client Alert

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

July 7, 2025The 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.Client Alert

Key Healthcare Provisions in Ohio’s 2026–2027 Budget

July 2, 2025Ohio’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.Client Alert

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

July 2, 2025On 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.
Older posts
Newer posts