Categories
Health Law Highlights

Wade’s Health Law Highlights for October 28, 2025

Artificial Intelligence

  • Insurance companies face lawsuits alleging AI algorithms denied patient care without human oversight. UnitedHealth Group, Cigna, and Humana are defending against claims that their AI programs led to denied care, though the companies deny using AI for coverage denials. A May survey from the National Association of Insurance Commissioners found 84% of 93 insurers used AI, with 68% using it for prior authorization approvals, though only 12% reported using it to deny authorization requests. Healthcare providers are deploying their own AI tools to automate prior authorization requests and appeals, with physicians spending an average of 13 hours per week on these requests and the industry spending nearly $13 billion on prior authorization in 2023. Providers have adopted AI faster than insurers, creating agent wars between the two sides. Source: Healthcare Brew
  • California has banned AI systems from using healthcare licensing terms that could mislead consumers about professional qualifications. Assembly Bill No. 489, enacted on October 11, 2025, prohibits AI and generative AI technologies from using terms like “doctor” or “M.D.” in advertising or functionality that falsely suggest operation by licensed healthcare professionals. The legislation extends existing prohibitions on unauthorized use of healthcare licensure terms to cover entities that develop or deploy AI systems in healthcare contexts. Healthcare professional licensing boards can enforce violations through injunctions and other remedies, with each instance of prohibited term usage constituting a separate violation. Companies operating AI systems in healthcare must implement compliance measures and disclaimers to avoid enforcement action under the law. Source: Orrick

Civil Investigative Demands

Compliance

  • Healthcare organizations that bill government payers must establish formalized compliance programs through a six-step process. Organizations should first designate a compliance officer and form a committee, then begin drafting a compliance manual using OIG General Compliance Program Guidance as a framework, with completion targeted within 6-12 months. During the manual development phase, organizations should implement an anonymous reporting mechanism and code of conduct, conduct a risk assessment to identify vulnerabilities, and create a first-year work plan that addresses priorities identified through the assessment. Once the manual is complete, organizations should develop compliance training for all employees. Source: Dentons On Call

Data Privacy

  • Healthcare organizations can leverage minimum viable data governance (MVDG) to overcome data management challenges and accelerate AI adoption. MVDG provides a framework built on five pillars: Data Stewardship, Data Quality, Data Privacy, Data Security, and Metadata Management. The approach integrates governance processes into operational workflows, reducing the time required to move projects from concept to execution. MVDG breaks down data silos by unifying information into a consistent source of truth and establishes the data quality processes needed for AI-powered solutions. This method is “smart scaling” in that it adapts governance to business needs rather than creating bottlenecks. Source: HealthTech Magazine
  • Healthcare providers must reconcile data accessibility with patient privacy as cybersecurity threats intensify. Industry leaders recommend role-based access controls, encryption, and integrated EHR systems as solutions. The Department of Health and Human Services is proposing updates to the HIPAA Security Rule for the first time in more than two decades. The proposed changes eliminate “addressable” implementation specifications, requiring organizations to fully implement, document, and enforce every safety feature from encryption to incident response. Technologies such as privacy-preserving data enclaves, AI-powered monitoring, and centralized HIPAA-compliant platforms can enable data sharing while protecting patient information. Source: Healthcare IT Today

Fraud & Abuse

  • A federal health care fraud prosecution in Dallas collapsed after a prosecutor and defense attorney deleted court-ordered text messages, leading to charges against both legal professionals. Former federal prosecutor Carlos A. Lopez, 48, and Dallas defense attorney Barrett R. Howell, 50, face misdemeanor charges for deleting government text messages in April 2023 that a judge had ordered them to produce. The misconduct forced the Justice Department to dismiss all charges with prejudice against three defendants who were accused of operating a $107 million Medicare fraud scheme through Trinity Clinical Laboratories LLC between 2018 and 2019. Both Lopez and Howell are expected to sign plea agreements and face up to one year in prison and $100,000 fines each. U.S. District Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn rebuked the Justice Department during a May 2023 hearing after learning of the deleted messages. Source: wfaa.com
  • The Department of Justice created the Enforcement & Affirmative Litigation Branch within its Civil Division on September 25, 2025. The Branch consists of two sections: the Enforcement Section, which will pursue cases under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, Consumer Product Safety Act, and Federal Trade Commission Act; and the Affirmative Litigation Section, which will bring lawsuits against states, municipalities, and private actors that allegedly obstruct administration policies. The reorganization does not create statutory powers but consolidates affirmative litigation functions. The Branch will focus on health care providers, drug and device marketing, and consumer product labeling, with False Claims Act enforcement related to gender-affirming care designated as a priority area. Companies in health care, pharmaceutical, and consumer-products sectors should review their marketing, labeling, and promotional protocols for compliance with federal standards. Source: Polsinelli

GLP-1

Marketing

Medicare Reimbursement

  • The HHS Office of Inspector General released a report calling for heightened oversight of Medicare billing for remote patient monitoring services. Medicare payments for RPM surpassed $500 million in 2024, serving nearly one million enrollees, despite Medicare coverage for RPM having been established only in 2019. OIG’s 2024 report found that nearly half of enrollees who received RPM services did not receive all three components: education and setup, device supply, and treatment management. The report recommends CMS monitor providers billing for enrollees with no prior practice history, new enrollees receiving RPM for the first time, enrollees never receiving treatment management, enrollees already receiving RPM at another practice, or multiple monitoring devices per month for a single enrollee. Providers should reinforce training and processes to ensure RPM services are medically necessary and compliant with Medicare requirements. Source: Morgan Lewis Health Law Scan

Mergers & Acquisitions

  • Healthcare buyers must conduct AI due diligence during mergers and acquisitions as organizations expand artificial intelligence use without governance frameworks. Many healthcare organizations deploy AI applications ranging from clinical decision-support interventions to patient communications without comprehensive monitoring strategies, creating compliance and liability risks for potential buyers. New state regulations compound these risks, with California’s Assembly Bill 489 prohibiting AI systems from suggesting medical advice comes from licensed professionals and Illinois banning AI use in mental health decision-making processes. Buyers should examine target companies’ AI oversight structures, governance programs, vendor contracts, and develop post-closing integration strategies to manage HIPAA violations and other legal exposures. The process requires collaboration between legal, IT, and clinical teams to assess risks and ensure compliance in this evolving regulatory landscape. Source: Sheppard Mullin Healthcare Law Blog

Value-Based Care

Wearables