Doe et al. v. Bonta et al.

Why this Matters:

The plaintiffs challenge a California law imposing new disclosure requirements on third parties providing financial assistance to  dialysis patients enrolled in private insurance. The law also caps reimbursement levels for certain dialysis providers at the amount that Medicare would pay. The plaintiffs argue that this California law violates the Supremacy Clause, as well as the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution. In this appeal, plaintiffs argue that the district court erred in holding that the First Amendment does not protect the financial contributions at issue.

Potential Impact:

Taking away the ability to impose reasonable disclosure and cost containment measures when Medicare or Medicaid eligible dialysis patients are steered to the commercial insurance market, where reimbursement rates are far higher, could drive up health care costs.