The state-action antitrust exemption grew out of the 1943 decision of Parker v. Brown, 317 U.S. 341 (1943), in which the Supreme Court explained that “nothing in the language of the Sherman Act or in its history suggests that its purpose was to restrain a state or its officers or agents from activities directed by its legislatures.” And, relying on principles of federalism, the Supreme Court gave deference to the state as a sovereign body.
Subsequent decisions expanded the reach of state-action to state and local governmental agencies (including counties and municipalities ...
On December 14, 2015, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas denied the Texas Medical Board's ("TMB") motion to dismiss an antitrust lawsuit brought by Teladoc, one of the nation's largest providers of telehealth services.[1] Teladoc sued the TMB in April 2015, challenging a rule requiring a face-to-face visit before a physician can issue a prescription to a patient. Following two recent Supreme Court cases stringently applying the state action doctrine, this case demonstrates the latest of the continued trend where state-sanctioned boards of market ...
Recent Updates
- What CMS's 2027 Fee Schedule Changes Mean for Shared Savings Program ACOs
- CMS Wants to End Certain COVID Requirements, Natural Light in Patient Care Areas: Proposed Rule Would Update CoPs for Hospitals, LTC Facilities, and Other Providers
- The Structural Pressures Behind Senior Living and Long-Term Care Distress
- CMS Proposed Rule to Implement Section 6224 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act
- FDA Finalizes Key Parts of Its NDIN Guidance Related to Identity and Safety Information: What Dietary Supplement Companies Should Know