Resources

Client Alerts, News Articles, Blog Posts, & Multimedia

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

Permanent Injunction of “Heartbeat” Abortion Ban in Ohio

Client Alert

On October 24, 2024, Hamilton County Common Pleas Judge Christian Jenkins held that Ohio’s six-week abortion ban (i.e., the “heartbeat” abortion ban) is unconstitutional under the state’s recently adopted reproductive rights amendment.

Ohio’s heartbeat law banned abortion once a heartbeat was detected and as early as six weeks into a pregnancy. The heartbeat law criminalized medical providers who rendered abortion care when a heartbeat was detected; penalties included felony charges, $20,000 fines, medical license suspension and revocation, and civil claims.

Attorney General Dave Yost previously argued that the heartbeat abortion ban could still take effect in Ohio despite passage in November 2023 of an abortion rights constitutional amendment. Judge Jenkins disagreed, holding that Ohio’s constitutional reproductive rights amendment is unambiguous and clearly represents the will of Ohio’s voters. According to Jenkins, the constitutional amendment must be given full effect, and any state laws, including the heartbeat law, that contradict it, must be enjoined.

The practical significance of this ruling is to provide clarity to medical providers regarding their ability to provide women’s health care without facing criminal, civil, or financial penalties, or actions against their license.

If you have questions about the ruling, or Ohio’s reproductive rights amendment, please contact BMD Healthcare Member Daphne Kackloudis at dlkackloudis@bmdllc.com  or Attorney Jordan Burdick at jaburdick@bmdllc.com.


Corporate Transparency Act Overhauled: U.S. Entities No Longer Required to Report

The Department of Treasury has issued an interim final rule significantly altering the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA). As of March 21, 2025, all U.S.-created entities and their beneficial owners are exempt from reporting requirements. Only non-U.S. entities registered to do business in the U.S. must still report, but they are not required to disclose U.S. citizen owners. Business owners should stay informed on these changes and consult legal counsel for compliance guidance.

ODM to Implement Medicaid Work Requirements: What Providers and Medicaid Expansion Recipients Need to Know

The Ohio Department of Medicaid (ODM) has submitted a waiver to impose work requirements for Medicaid expansion recipients. If approved, the new eligibility criteria will take effect on January 1, 2026. A federal public comment period is open until April 7, 2025.

Ohio Appellate Court Rules in Favor of Gender-Affirming Care

On March 18, 2025, the 10th District Court of Appeals in Franklin County ruled that Ohio’s House Bill (HB) 68, which restricts puberty blockers and hormone therapy for minors seeking gender-affirming care, violates the Health Care Freedom Amendment and is therefore unenforceable. The court found that the law unlawfully interferes with parental rights and medical decision-making. The case, Moe v. Yost, has been remanded, and Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost intends to appeal.

HHS Revokes Public Comment Requirement on Certain Policy Changes

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has revoked the Richardson Waiver, eliminating the requirement for public notice and comment on certain policy changes. This decision allows HHS to implement new policies more quickly, potentially affecting healthcare funding rules like Medicaid work requirements. While it speeds up policymaking, it also reduces opportunities for stakeholder input, raising concerns over transparency and unintended consequences for healthcare providers, states, and patients.

Don't Get Caught Dazed and Confused: Another Florida Court Weighs in on Employer Obligations to Accommodate Medical Marijuana Use

A Florida trial court ruled in Giambrone v. Hillsborough County that employers may need to accommodate off-duty medical marijuana use under the Florida Civil Rights Act (FCRA). This contrasts with prior rulings and raises new compliance challenges for employers. With the case on appeal, now is the time to review workplace drug policies.