The Antelope Valley Times

Your community. Your issues. Your news.

  • Home
  • Latest News
  • Local
    • Palmdale
    • Lancaster
    • Los Angeles County
    • Littlerock
    • Lake Los Angeles
    • Rosamond
    • Edwards AFB
    • Acton
  • Crime
  • Politics
  • Education
  • Health
  • Business
  • Opinion
    • Advertise
    • About
    • Contact Us
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    Show Search

Judge denies TRO to health plans group over SB 510

by City News Service • May 5, 2022 Leave a Comment

A judge this week denied a request by the California Association of Health Plans for a temporary restraining order while it challenges the constitutionality of a state bill requiring health plans and insurers to pay for workplace COVID-19 testing performed retroactively to March 4, 2020 and to do so by July 1.

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Mitchell Beckloff instead scheduled a June 24 hearing on whether a preliminary injunction should be issued.

The CAHP is a trade association representing 45 full-service plans that provide health care coverage to more than 26 million Californians through the individual and group markets. Their petition was brought Nov. 10 against Attorney General Rob Bonta as well as Mary Watanabe, director of the California Department of Managed Health Care.

Attorneys for the organization asked for an emergency hearing on their TRO request, arguing that to have a chance at even partial compliance, health plans would have to immediately begin to process claims, costing them hundreds of hours and millions of dollars in unrecoverable costs.

“Without a TRO, health plans would have no choice but to start processing claims to avoid interest and penalties on at least some claims,” the CAHP attorneys stated in their court papers.

State Senate Bill 510, signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom on Oct. 8, became effective Jan. 1 and requires health plans and health insurers to reimburse both in-network and out-of-network providers for COVID-19 testing and related services without any cost-sharing, prior authorization or other utilization management requirements. The March 4, 2020, date for retroactive payments refers to when Newsom declared a state of emergency for COVID-19.

SB 510 requires insurers to pay for COVID-19 testing of workers in a workplace setting even if they are asymptomatic and have no known exposure. The CAHP challenges SB 510’s retroactivity requirement as unconstitutional.

“It strips health plans of vested contractual rights without any valid social justification — in violation of both the contracts clause and the due process clause — and imposes criminal penalties for past conduct,” the CAHP lawyers argue in their court papers.

–

Filed Under: Health, Home

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Comments

  • Mike Mike on Patti LaBelle to perform at Palmdale Amphitheater on July 9: “Well Wendy, if you get hot you can pull your big breast over your head and cool off. Patti is…” May 27, 21:15
  • Edward Pepper on Pedestrian hit, killed on 14 Freeway in Palmdale ID’d: “I knew him as unstable when drinking.” May 27, 20:56
  • I am for the 2nd Amendment on Readers Speak Out! (new): “That is not unreasonable. Good suggestion” May 27, 19:57
  • America's Most Besotted Bumbler on Mail carrier from Palmdale arrested in jobless benefits fraud case: “Non-violent white collar crime ripping off the government rather than an individual, doesn’t seem as punishable to me as violent,…” May 27, 18:38
  • America's Most Deranged Dimwit on Mail carrier from Palmdale arrested in jobless benefits fraud case: ““10% for the big guy.” LOL I’m tall, so I’m gonna have T-shirts made saying that. Maybe I can run…” May 27, 18:30

Copyright © 2022 · The AV Times LLC. All rights reserved. Terms of Use