André Moore Associate Editor Loyola University Chicago School of Law, JD ‘25 Employment law, an essential aspect of regulatory compliance, is the foundation for the legal relationship between employers and employees. Marked by significant regulatory changes aimed at enhancing worker protections, ensuring fair compensation, and promoting a safe and equitable workplace. These updates span …
Read more
In 1973, the Supreme Court ruled in Roe v. Wade that states could not create onerous requirements that interfered with a patient’s right to an abortion up to the point of viability of the fetus, which was around 24 weeks. Roe and Planned Parenthood v. Casey established and protected patients’ rights to privacy and healthcare autonomy in reproductive health. However, as I previously explained in Abort Texas’ New Abortion Law, Texas’ new law erodes that decision. On January 20, 2022, the Supreme Court was presented with the opportunity to address this issue. The Court denied Texas abortion clinics’ request to immediately return to litigation over the Court’s acceptance of Texas’ six-week abortion law. However, the threat to reproductive health is not isolated to Texas; other states have enacted similar laws.
The Coalition to Protect Telehealth and State Representative Deb Conroy of the Illinois 46th House District have introduced legislation that would permanently expand access to telehealth services for Illinoisans. The legislation also details provisions that promote telehealth payment rate partity between telehealth services and in-person care. In a direct response to the COVID-19 pandemic, telehealth providers have been granted temporary waivers to align their payment rates with those prescribed for traditional care in health care facilities. These waivers have served as stabilizing financial mechanisms for many practitioners experiencing revenue loss due to the restrictions on elective procedures and non-emergency care. The proposed legislation would give patients more freedom to utilize telehealth services by removing the patient responsibilities to demonstrate hardship or access issues.
Arizona and Idaho are the most recent in a long line of states declining to adopt the American Bar Association’s (ABA) new Model Rule 8.4(g), which is being called the “anti-discrimination” rule. This rule was adopted by the ABA to specifically address harassment and discrimination based on race, religion, sex, disability, and LGBTQ status in all conduct related to the practice of law. However, because of the broad construction and application of the rule, many states and attorneys have concerns that compliance with this anti-discrimination rule will infringe on their First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and religion.
Access to quality, comprehensive health care services seems to always be at the forefront of our health care industry. One’s ability to gain access measured in terms of utilization, is dependent upon financial affordability, and physical accessibility. While a seemingly small issue under the overarching ‘access to health care’ topic, talks about access to medication and its affordability in particular for the vulnerable and underinsured patients must also be addressed. A number of health organizations have sued HHS for delaying the implementation of rules that would force drug companies to be transparent about their pricing and punish them for overcharging participating hospitals in the federal program that discounts outpatient medication. Due to HHS’ delays, hospitals cannot challenge drug manufacturers for overpricing outpatient medication thus they cannot access refunds of discounts that are due to them under statute.
In a rare ruling on September 12, 2017, the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules (JCAR) unanimously approved revisions to the Illinois Commerce Commission’s (ICC) proposed Part 412 Order. The ICC and members of the Alternative Retail Electric Suppliers (ARES) community negotiated the adopted compromise language. Part 412 of the Illinois Administrative Code, Title 83, Chapter 1, outlines the obligations of retail electric suppliers. Lobbyists for Retail Energy Supply Association (RESA) estimate that this compromise has been up to five years in the making.
Mac Matarieh Associate Editor Loyola University Chicago School of Law, JD 2018 On October 3, 2016 Tenet Healthcare Corporation (Tenet) announced that they have reached a settlement with the United States Government for $514 million. The settlement stems from a violation of the anti-kickback law by four of Tenet’s hospital subsidiaries. The hospitals allegedly …
Read more
With an increasing emphasis on sustainability and ethical practices, Environmental, Social, and Governance (“ESG”) factors have become pivotal for both corporations and investors. Environmental responsibility concerns a company’s impact on the planet, including carbon emissions, energy consumption, and pollution. Social responsibility encompasses people and culture as well as their impact within the community. Lastly, governance entails how companies are managed and whether they hold their leaders accountable. While ESG has become increasingly important to corporations across America, demand for ESG products has also grown important to investors. Despite challenges, the future of ESG investing appears promising, provided stakeholders adapt to evolving markets and regulations.
In the battle against nicotine addiction, particularly among our nation’s youth, the regulatory industry stands as a crucial line of defense. However, recent developments suggest that this block is faltering, leaving our young generation increasingly vulnerable to the grips of addiction. Despite well-intentioned efforts, the regulatory landscape surrounding nicotine products has proven inadequate in safeguarding young adults from the harmful effects of addiction. In this blog post, the shortcomings of current regulations and propose actionable solutions to address this pressing issue will be explored.
On February 21, 2024, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) argued in front of the U.S. Supreme Court, attempting to continue regulation of the “Good Neighbor” rule in eleven states. The EPA announced the final “Good Neighbor Plan” on March 15, 2023. The “Good Neighbor Plan” established under the Clean Air Act (CAA) aims at reducing emissions from upwind states that cause pollution in downwind states.