Philo D. Hall, Member of the Firm in the firm’s Health Care & Life Sciences practice, in the firm’s Washington, DC, office, was quoted in Inside Health Policy, in “Lawyer: Legal Issues on Preemption of PBM Regulation Unresolved,” by Jessica Karins. (Read the full version – subscription required.)

Following is an excerpt:

The Supreme Court will likely need to issue a new decision to resolve the extent to which state laws seeking to regulate pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) are preempted by federal insurance law, a lawyer specializing in health policy said at AHIP’s annual conference this month.

Philo Hall, senior general counsel at the law firm Epstein Becker and Green, said preemption of state laws that conflict with federal ERISA, Medicare Advantage (MA) and Part D requirements is currently one of the most significant areas of Medicare law. In a 2020 case, Rutledge v. Pharmacy Care Management Association (PCMA), the Supreme Court ruled that the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) did not prevent an Arkansas law on PBMs’ payments for prescription drugs.

“I think what we’ve seen since then is that more guidance is needed from the Supreme Court on that topic,” he said. “And we might be headed to the Supreme Court.” …

Now, the Tenth Circuit will hear the case PCMA v. Mulready, in which PCMA is challenging an Oklahoma state law that also aims to block what the state sees as abusive PBM practices, such as preferring pharmacies that are owned by the PBM. In that case, the judge has asked the Department of Justice (DOJ) to weigh in with an amicus brief on ERISA preemption of state PBM laws.

“That has been a big question for years, and now they’re formally being asked to weigh in, in this case,” Hall said. “So, it could be setting up a circuit split and then headed to the Supreme Court, but I’m most curious about what’s going to be in that DOJ amicus brief on behalf of CMS.”

While CMS would normally be expected to argue that federal law preempts state approaches, Hall said that could be different in this case.

Hall said other litigation is likely to concern topics like the new Medicare Advantage overpayment rule issued by CMS in December 2022 and the 340B drug pricing program.

Jump to Page

Privacy Preference Center

When you visit any website, it may store or retrieve information on your browser, mostly in the form of cookies. This information might be about you, your preferences or your device and is mostly used to make the site work as you expect it to. The information does not usually directly identify you, but it can give you a more personalized web experience. Because we respect your right to privacy, you can choose not to allow some types of cookies. Click on the different category headings to find out more and change our default settings. However, blocking some types of cookies may impact your experience of the site and the services we are able to offer.

Strictly Necessary Cookies

These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually only set in response to actions made by you which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in or filling in forms. You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not then work. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable information.

Performance Cookies

These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They help us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site. All information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous. If you do not allow these cookies we will not know when you have visited our site, and will not be able to monitor its performance.