Robert E. Wanerman, Member of the Firm in the Health Care & Life Sciences practice, in the firm’s Washington, DC, office, was quoted in POLITICO Pro Health Care, in “Supreme Court to Hear Arguments in DSH Formula Case,” by Rachel Roubein.

Following is an excerpt:

The Supreme Court will hear arguments Tuesday in a major case on Medicare payments that pivots around a 2017 ruling that Brett Kavanaugh wrote while he was a circuit court judge.

At issue in Azar v. Allina Health Services is whether HHS should have solicited public comment before changing the formula for reimbursing mostly non-profit hospitals that treat a large number of poor patients. HHS argues upholding Kavanaugh’s ruling could “substantially undermine” its ability to administer the huge health program.

The nonprofits refute that argument, saying Medicare law requires the agency to seek feedback when it wants to make big changes, such as when it cut disproportionate share, or DSH, payments to the hospitals for 2012. …

Kavanaugh ruled HHS should have gone through a notice-and-comment period and is recusing himself from Tuesday’s arguments. That creates the possibility of a 4-4 high court split that would leave the D.C. Circuit Court decision in place without setting further precedent.

If this decision stands, the federal government contends CMS would have to go through more frequent lengthy rulemaking processes, specifically concerning instructions to contractors — and that this would then slow down its work on Medicare.

The hospitals say the ruling won’t lead to a significant administrative burden and require as much rulemaking as HHS claims. The case doesn’t affect the current DSH payments, which are made using a formula that went through a notice-and-comment process. …

But the D.C. Circuit ruled that Medicare law is much stricter and doesn’t include all the Administrative Procedure Act’s exceptions for notice-and-comment periods. It acknowledged it was breaking with several other appeals courts when Kavanaugh reversed a district court decision that sided with the government. …

A ruling for the hospitals could also spark more legal challenges from providers. That’s because it would give “a lot more muscle” to stakeholders who want to sue when CMS makes a unilateral decision to change the Medicare program, said Robert Wanerman, a partner with Epstein Becker Green.

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.