Resources

Client Alerts, News Articles, Blog Posts, & Multimedia

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

Supreme Court Upholds Coverage under the Affordable Care Act

Client Alert

On June 27, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark decision upholding the authority of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) to make determinations about preventive services coverage mandated by the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The ACA mandates that group health plans and health insurance issuers provide coverage for over 100 preventive health services without cost-sharing.

Following the Supreme Court’s ruling, the USPSTF can continue issuing recommendations for services that must be covered by health insurers without cost-sharing.

In Kennedy v. Braidwood Mgmt. Inc., No. 24–316. (S.C. 2025), Braidwood Management (and others) argued that the USPSTF’s requirement to cover an HIV prevention medication violated its religious freedoms.

In its ruling, the Supreme Court reversed a Fifth Circuit decision that had found the delegation of authority to the USPSTF violated the Appointments Clause. The Supreme Court reasoned that USPSTF members are “inferior officers” of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary instead of “principal officers”, despite their independence in the Affordable Care Act context.

As a result, the USPSTF can continue to recommend coverage for preventive services using a grading system. Per the ACA, for covered services with an 'A' or 'B' rating, health plans and insurance issuers offering group or individual insurance coverage “shall, at a minimum, provide coverage for and not impose any cost sharing requirements” for the “evidence-based items or services that have in effect a rating of ‘A’ or ‘B’ in the current recommendations” of the USPSTF. Covered services with an 'A' or 'B' rating include certain cancer screenings, risk-reducing breast cancer medications, statin medications reducing the risk of heart disease and stroke, and physical therapy to help the elderly avoid falls.

The practical coverage provisions of the ACA remain in effect, meaning over 150 million Americans can continue to access a wide range of preventive health care services each year at no cost to them. For providers, this ruling maintains the status quo, ensuring providers can continue to provide screenings and resulting treatment paid for by insurance without having to chase patients for cost sharing amounts.  

The case is Kennedy v. Braidwood Mgmt. Inc., No. 24–316. (S.C. 2025).

To learn more about this ruling and the ACA’s coverage of preventive services, please contact BMD Healthcare Member Daphne Kackloudis at dlkackloudis@bmdllc.com or Attorney Jordan Burdick at jaburdick@bmdllc.com.


January 2025 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Brings Notable Changes to HIPAA Security Rule

In January 2025, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services proposed amendments to the HIPAA Security Rule, aiming to enhance cybersecurity for covered entities (CEs) and business associates (BAs). Key changes include mandatory compliance audits, workforce training, vulnerability scans, and risk assessments. Comments on the proposed rule are due by March 7, 2025.

Corporate Transparency Act Effective Again

The federal judiciary has issued multiple rulings on the enforceability of the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA), which took effect on January 1, 2024. Previously, enforcement was halted nationwide due to litigation in Smith v. U.S. Department of the Treasury. However, on February 18th, the court lifted the stay, reinstating the CTA’s reporting requirements. Non-exempt entities now have until March 21, 2025, to comply. Businesses should act promptly to avoid civil penalties of $591 per day and potential criminal liability.

Status Update: Physician Noncompete Agreements in Ohio

Noncompete agreements remain enforceable in Ohio if they meet specific legal requirements. While the AMA and FTC have challenged these restrictions, courts continue to uphold reasonable noncompete provisions for physicians. Recent cases, like MetroHealth System v. Khandelwal, highlight how courts may modify overly restrictive agreements to balance employer interests with patient care. With ongoing legal challenges to the FTC’s proposed ban, Ohio physicians should consult a healthcare attorney before signing or challenging a noncompete agreement.

Immigration Orders and Their Economic Impact on Small Business: Insights from Attorney and Former Immigration Judge Rob Ratliff

President Trump's recent executive orders, targeting immigration policies, could significantly impact small businesses in Ohio, particularly those owned by undocumented immigrants. With stricter visa vetting, halted refugee admissions, and potential deportations, these businesses face uncertainty, workforce disruption, and closures. Ohio's immigrant-owned businesses, especially in food services and transportation, contribute billions to the state economy, and any disruption could result in economic ripple effects.

Corporate Transparency Act Ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court

The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled on the enforceability of the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA), lifting an injunction previously imposed by the Fifth Circuit. However, a separate nationwide injunction remains in effect, meaning businesses are still not required to comply with the CTA’s reporting requirements. FinCEN continues to accept voluntary reporting while enforcement remains paused.