Healthcare Empowered

Summary of article from Husch Blackwell, by Ragini A. Acharya. Matthew Deutsch:

The Supreme Court’s recent decision to overturn Chevron deference marks a significant shift in administrative law, transferring interpretive authority from federal agencies to the courts. This ruling, driven by concerns over judicial abdication and regulatory inconsistency, is expected to slow the pace of agency regulations, particularly impacting healthcare agencies like the FDA and HHS. The change poses challenges for the adoption of AI in medical research, potentially delaying innovations in clinical trials and safety monitoring due to increased legal scrutiny. While proponents argue that Congress should oversee emerging technologies such as AI, the decision raises concerns about the responsiveness and adaptability of agencies in addressing public health emergencies and technological advancements. Overall, the healthcare sector must now navigate a more cautious and litigious regulatory environment.

Summary of article from ArentFox Schiff, by Douglas a. Grimm, Lowell C. Brown, David S. Greenberg, Pascal Naples:

The Supreme Court’s decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo overturns the Chevron deference, requiring courts to independently interpret ambiguous statutory provisions rather than deferring to federal agencies. This shift, particularly impacting the health care industry, reinstates the more limited Skidmore deference, where courts only defer to agency interpretations found persuasive. Additionally, the decision in Corner Post v. Federal Reserve extends the statute of limitations for challenging agency actions, potentially increasing litigation against agency regulations. Health care organizations may face greater regulatory uncertainty and variability across jurisdictions as courts independently interpret complex statutes and regulations. Consequently, HHS may adopt more cautious regulatory approaches and increased reliance on guidance over formal rulemaking.