|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|20-1641||6th Cir.||TBD||TBD||TBD||TBD||OT 2021|
Issues: (1) Whether a group health plan that provides uniform reimbursement of all dialysis treatments observe the prohibition provided by the Medicare Secondary Payer Act that group health plans may not “take into account” the fact that a plan participant with end stage renal disease is eligible for Medicare benefits; (2) whether a plan that provides the same dialysis benefits to all plan participants, and reimburses dialysis providers uniformly regardless of whether the patient has end stage renal disease, observe the prohibition under the Medicare Secondary Payer Act that a group health plan also may not “differentiate” between individuals with end stage renal disease and others “in the benefits it provides”; and (3) whether the Medicare Secondary Payer Act is a coordination-of-benefits measure designed to protect Medicare, not an antidiscrimination law designed to protect certain providers from alleged disparate impact of uniform treatment.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|May 21 2021||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due June 24, 2021)|
|Jun 24 2021||Waiver of right of respondent Davita Inc., et al. to respond filed.|
|Jun 30 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/27/2021.|
|Jul 21 2021||Response Requested. (Due August 20, 2021)|
|Aug 05 2021||Motion to extend the time to file a response from August 20, 2021 to September 20, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Aug 06 2021||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including September 20, 2021.|
|Sep 20 2021||Brief of respondents Davita Inc., et al. in opposition filed.|
|Oct 04 2021||Reply of petitioners Marietta Memorial Hospital Employee Health Benefit Plan, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 06 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/29/2021.|
|Nov 01 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/5/2021.|
|Nov 05 2021||Petition GRANTED.|
Bill Cosby’s prosecutors asked the Supreme Court to reinstate his conviction today. Quick explainer.
In our latest episode of SCOTUStalk, @shefalil of @19thnews joined us to preview Wednesday's argument in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health. Shefali explains the current state of abortion access and the case's implications in Mississippi and across America.
Roe, Dobbs, and the current state of abortion access - SCOTUSblog
In advance of Wednesday's oral argument in the momentous abortion case, Shefali Luthra, a gender and health care r...
Update: Without calling for a response or referring the case to the full court, Justice Breyer just rejected last week's challenge from Massachusetts hospital workers who object to the hospital's COVID vaccine mandate.
(Breyer handles emergency requests from Massachusetts.)
JUST IN: Another shadow-docket challenge to a COVID vaccine mandate. This one is from employees at Mass General Brigham who say the Boston-based hospital violated federal law by not granting them exemptions from the hospital's vaccine policy. Filing here: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/21A175.pdf
Today at SCOTUS: The justices return to the bench for oral argument in a case about Medicare payments to hospitals that serve low-income patients. Lots of money at stake, plus potential implications for the Chevron doctrine. @JACoganJr explains the case:
Money for safety-net hospitals at stake in dispute over Medicare payment formula - SCOTUSblog
When it comes to highlighting the complexity of the Medicare Act and its hospital payment rules, Becerra v. Empire...
Two days from now, SCOTUS will hear the biggest abortion case in a generation. In a battle over a Mississippi law, abortion opponents are asking the court to end the constitutional right to abortion. Here's our preview of the case, via @AHoweBlogger.
Roe v. Wade hangs in balance as reshaped court prepares to hear biggest abortion case in decades - SCOTUSblog
When he ran for president in 2016, then-candidate Donald Trump promised to nominate Supreme Court justices who would...
JUST IN: One new cert grant this morning: Berger v. North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP. More on the case here: https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/berger-v-north-carolina-state-conference-of-the-naacp/
#SCOTUS adds one new case to its merits docket this morning: Berger v. NC Conference of NAACP, in which the justices will weigh in on an effort by Republican legislators in the state to intervene to defend the state’s voter-ID law. Here's the order: https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/112421zr_7li8.pdf