Richard H. Hughes, IV, and William Walters, attorneys in the Health Care & Life Sciences practice, in the firm’s Washington, DC, office, were quoted in AIS Health, in “SCOTUS Cases Could Create ‘Fractured’ Health Care Policy Landscape,” by Leslie Small. (Read the full version – subscription required.)
Following is an excerpt:
In January, the U.S. Supreme Court is slated to hear two cases brought by fishing companies that, at first glance, would seem to have nothing to do with health insurers. However, the outcome of those cases could profoundly change how insurers — and companies of all stripes — interact with the many regulations that govern their businesses.
That’s because the cases — Loper Bright Enterprises, et al. v. Gina Raimondo and Relentless Inc., et al. v. Dept. of Commerce, et al — concern a legal doctrine known as Chevron deference, which for decades has given federal agencies considerable leeway when interpreting laws via rulemaking. If the high court strikes down that longstanding legal precedent, the regulatory landscape that governs every industry could become much more chaotic, legal experts tell AIS Health, a division of MMIT. …
“So much regulation in health care occurs through detailed agency rules and administrative actions, so removing Chevron deference is inevitably going to reshape much of how health care is regulated,” says Richard Hughes IV, an attorney and partner at Epstein Becker Green.
“In particular, overturning Chevron could upend the Biden administration’s focus on drug pricing in Medicare, as implementation of the Inflation Reduction Act’s drug price negotiation provisions is delegated more or less entirely to CMS,” adds William Walters, an associate at Epstein Becker Green.
