by Elizabeth E. Hogue, Esq.
Many providers have expressed concern about the use of “guidance” and “interpretive guidelines,” for example, by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to make major changes to requirements of the Medicare Program. On June 3, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an important decision that requires CMS to provide notices and comment periods in formal rulemaking processes when establishing or changing “substantive legal standards” (Azar, Secretary of Health and Human Services v. Allina Health Services et al., No. 17-1484, U.S. Supreme Court, June 3, 2019). The Court said that when CMS doesn’t identify a lawful excuse for neglecting its obligations to provide statutory notices and comment periods, policies that aren’t based on such notices and comment periods must be vacated.”guidance issue” of course, what counts as a “substantive legal standard.” CMS said that the statute requiring notice and a comment period distinguishes substantive from interpretive legal standards. “Substantive rules” have the “force and effect of law” while “interpretive rules” just “advise the public of CMS’ construction” of statutes and rules that it administers.
The Court rejected CMS’s argument [and HCTR readers interested in the Court’s reasoning in this matter should return to the original article for these details.]
©2019 Elizabeth E. Hogue, Esq. All rights reserved. No portion of this material may be reproduced in any form without the advance written permission of the author.elizabethhogue@elizabethhogue.netThis article originally appeared by permission in Tim Rowan’s Home Care Technology Report. homecaretechreport.com