CON-FLICTS

Modern Healthcare - - THE WEEK -

Two law­suits chal­leng­ing cer­tifi­cate- of- need laws ar­gue that states could vi­o­late the Con­sti­tu­tion by lim­it­ing com­pe­ti­tion among health­care providers: Yakima Val­ley Memo­rial Hospi­tal v. Wash­ing­ton State Depart­ment of Health–--Yakima Val­ley ( Wash.) Memo­rial is chal­leng­ing a 2007 CON law on elec­tive stent pro­ce­dures and an­gio­plasty. The 9th U.S. Cir­cuit Court of Ap­peals in Seattle is con­sid­er­ing the case for the sec­ond time in two years, now ex­am­in­ing whether the law puts an ex­ces­sive burden on in­ter­state com­merce rel­a­tive to the lo­cal ben­e­fits it cre­ates.

Colon Health Cen­ters of Amer­ica v.

Bill Hazel–---- Two physi­cian prac­tices are ask­ing a Dis­trict Court judge to de­clare Vir­ginia’s CON pro­gram un­con­sti­tu­tional be­cause they say it dis­crim­i­nates against in­ter­state com­merce and vi­o­lates rights granted un­der the 14th Amend­ment. A rul­ing on the state’s mo­tion to dis­miss is pend­ing.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.