News

Supreme Court’s ruling could jeopardize state medical board regulation


 

References

“The Supreme Court decision is consistent with the arguments made by the AANA and its co-amici who urged the Supreme Court to affirm the appellate court’s decision for a number of reasons, including concerns that unsupervised state regulatory boards comprised mostly of practicing professionals have the potential of acting in their own economic self-interest by protecting their competitive position in ways not intended or authorized by the state, thus warranting oversight.”

The North Carolina Medical Society said the Supreme Court decision runs contrary to the time-tested regulatory model used nationwide by states to regulate learned professions.

“The decision focuses narrowly on antitrust law, not on the broader and far more important issue of protecting the public through effective regulation of medical practice,” the medical society said.

State medical boards will need to time to analyze the decision and decide how the ruling might affect the way in which they operate, said Dr. Humayun J. Chaudhry, president and CEO of the Federation of State Medical Boards. The FSMB plans to hold a webinar March 5 to address how state medical boards should apply the ruling.

“We recognize the importance of this decision and will now begin to make better sense of it and begin to address the open-ended questions” left by the ruling, he said in an interview. “What kind of impact [the decision has] remains to be seen.”

The AMA expressed disappointment with the decision.

“State medical boards are authorized by state governments to regulate medical licensing and medical practice in the interest of patient safety,” noted AMA President Robert M. Wah in a statement. “The AMA agrees with Justice [Samuel] Alito, speaking for the three dissenting justices, that today’s decision ‘will spawn confusion’ by creating far-reaching effects on the jurisdiction of states to regulate medicine and protect patient safety.

“The AMA will work with other physician groups to secure policy changes to reinforce long-held antitrust protections for activities conducted under state authority to protect patients,” Dr. Wah said.

agallegos@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @legal_med

Pages

Recommended Reading

The tipping point for value-based pay?
MDedge Endocrinology
Lawmakers, experts favor October start for ICD-10
MDedge Endocrinology
Coding change may make cryopreservation more accessible
MDedge Endocrinology
Feds: ACA enrollment extended for some
MDedge Endocrinology
CMS delays overpayment reporting rule
MDedge Endocrinology
Feds open ACA special enrollment period during tax season
MDedge Endocrinology
New board offers alternative MOC certification process for doctors
MDedge Endocrinology
Report: Newly insured patients won’t strain health system
MDedge Endocrinology
Utah lawmakers first to pass model telemedicine bill
MDedge Endocrinology
CMS extends 2014 Medicare meaningful use attestation deadline
MDedge Endocrinology