American Hospital Association v. Becerra

American Hospital Association v. Becerra
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued November 30, 2021
Full case name	American Hospital Association, et al. v. Xavier Becerra, Secretary of Health and Human Services, et al.
Docket no.	20-1114
Questions presented
(1) Whether Chevron deference permits HHS to set reimbursement rates based on acquisition cost and vary such rates by hospital group if it has not collected adequate hospital acquisition cost survey data. (2) Whether petitioners’ suit challenging HHS’s adjustments is precluded by 42 U. S. C. §1395l(t)(12).
Court membership
Chief Justice John Roberts Associate Justices Clarence Thomas · Stephen Breyer Samuel Alito · Sonia Sotomayor Elena Kagan · Neil Gorsuch Brett Kavanaugh · Amy Coney Barrett

American Hospital Association v. Beccera is a case pending before the Supreme Court of the United States. The court granted the petition for a writ of certiorari on July 2, 2021.^[1] The case will be argued and decided in the court's 2021–2022 term. The case centers around a rule from the Department of Health and Human Services which reduced reimbursement rates for certain hospitals. Several hospital associations and hospitals affected by the rule sued the DHHS, alleging that it has exceeded its statutory authority. The court is tasked with deciding if the rule is a reasonable interpretation of the law, and if the law blocks judicial review of the rule in the first place.^[2]

Background[]

Rule in question[]

The rule being challenged deals with 340B hospitals and Medicare Part B insured patients. The government used to reimburse hospitals at a uniform rate if the hospital provided outpatient care to Medicare Part B recipients. The DHHS then changed the rule to reduce reimbursement rates for 340B hospitals, because they can get drugs at lower costs.^[3]

Lower court decisions[]

The district court initially found in favor of the American Hospital Association, stating the government exceeded its statutory authority. The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit however, found that the rule was a reasonable interpretation of the law.^[2] On March 15, 2021, a petition for an appeal to the Supreme Court was filed.^[1]

References[]