Policy vs. Legal Perspectives on Healthcare Price Transparency

Managed Healthcare Executive

Stuart M. Gerson, a Member of the Firm in the Litigation and Health Care and Life Sciences practices, in the firm’s Washington, DC, office, authored an article in Managed Healthcare Executive titled “Policy vs. Legal Perspectives on Healthcare Price Transparency.” The article discusses the Supreme Court’s ruling in Gobeille v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co.

Following is an excerpt:

The case was brought by Liberty Mutual Insurance Company’s self-funded, self-insured health plan, which provides benefits in all 50 states and is not subject to regulation by Vermont, and the Court invalidated the statute.

This decision is proving more controversial in health policy circles, where transparency is seen as a public policy attribute that should be expanded, than it is in legal circles where the matter is viewed as one of legislative jurisdiction that potentially is subject to change by uniform federal executive branch action or congressional legislation.

In an important victory for preemption advocates, the Court held that this law was preempted by The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), which expressly preempts “any and all State laws insofar as they may now or hereafter relate to any employee benefit plan.”