DOJ’s New Self-Disclosure Policy and Corporate Whistleblower Awards Pilot Program
AGG Talks: Healthcare Insights Podcast - Episode 4: What to Do When Insurance Companies Deny Behavioral Health Claims
Video: Braidwood v. Becerra – Challenging the Affordable Care Act’s Preventive Services Coverage Provision – Thought Leaders in Health Law
Updates to Statute 1557 that Healthcare Providers Need to Know
The No Surprises Act: A Cost Saving Opportunity for Employer Plan Sponsors
Podcast: Health Equity – Behind the Buzzwords – Diagnosing Health Care
Opting Out of Medicare: When and How to Do It
The Burr Broadcast April 2023 - The Official End of COVID-19 Emergencies
Video: Health Care's Past, Present, and Future - Diagnosing Health Care Podcast
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 117: Chris Severn, Co-Founder & CEO, Turquoise Health
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 115: Dr. Michael Havig, CEO, HealthMe
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 106: Dr. James McElligott, MUSC & Dr. Shawn Stinson, BlueCross BlueShield of SC
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Benefits Companion - Health Plan Transparency Requirements
Thinking About a Concierge Medical Practice? Assure Compliance with Payor Requirements and the Law
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Benefits Companion - New Prescription Drug and Health Coverage Reporting Requirements
Video: Getting Ready for the No Surprises Act - Thought Leaders in Health Law
Podcast: What Is the Future of the Acute Care Hospital Industry? - Diagnosing Health Care
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Benefits Companion - Can Employers Impose a Health Insurance Surcharge on Plan Participants Not Vaccinated for COVID-19?
Compliance Into The Weeds - Delta Airlines Responds to the Delta Variant
AGG Talks: Solving Employers’ Problems - The American Rescue Plan Act’s COBRA Subsidy: What Is It and How Does It Work?
When the Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriages back in 2015, the IRS clarified that two people are legally married under federal law when they also are legally married under their state’s law. Because of this...more
California v. Texas, Nos. 19-840, 19-1019: The Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate, as it is commonly known, requires individuals to maintain a minimum level of health insurance coverage. As originally passed, the Act...more
Respondeat superior (literally, "let the master answer" in Latin) is a doctrine that applies when an employer or principal has the ability and authority to direct and control the pertinent acts of the employee. Put otherwise,...more
After last month’s decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in Obergefell v. Hodges, employee benefit plan sponsors may wonder whether Obergefell affirmatively imposes an obligation for employers to provide health, life,...more
In Obergefell v. Hodges, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the 14th Amendment to the Constitution requires all 50 states to license marriages between same-sex couples and to recognize same-sex marriages performed out-of-state....more
Supreme Court - As explained in more detail in separate alerts we issued over the past several days, the Supreme Court decided two major cases involving the Affordable Care Act and same-sex marriage. First, as described...more
In a 5-4 decision announced last Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Obergefell v. Hodges that all states are required to recognize same-sex marriages. This ruling follows the Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in U.S. v....more
On June 26, 2015, in Obergefell v. Hodges, the Supreme Court of the United States determined that it is unconstitutional for a state to ban same-sex couples from exercising the fundamental right to marry. As a result of this...more
On Friday, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its long-awaited opinion in the Obergefell case, striking down bans on same-sex marriage as unconstitutional and legalizing same-sex marriage in every state. We posted...more
On June 26th, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution requires every state to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. In a 5-4...more
Two big decisions in two days from the Supreme Court. Read on for details. Same-Sex Marriage is a Go! Today, the United States Supreme Court issued a monumental decision in Obergefell, et al. v. Hodges, et al.; Case No....more
On June 26, 2013, in U.S. v. Windsor, the U.S. Supreme Court held that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act ("DOMA") was unconstitutional. Section 3 of DOMA provided that, for the purpose of any federal law, "marriage"...more
How Does the DOMA Defeat Impact Healthcare Reform and Health Insurance Access? - NOTE: The Supreme Court's 5-4 decision to invalidate the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) will affect more than 1,000 federal statutes—and...more
The regulation of marriage was historically presumed to be the exclusive domain of the states. Since 1996, however, the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996 (“DOMA”) changed this presumption in two important respects...more
Two controversial cases involving same-sex marriage were decided on June 26, 2013 by the United States Supreme Court. ...more
Last week, the Supreme Court of the United States struck down as unconstitutional a key provision of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) that defined “marriage” for purposes of over 1,100 federal laws as a legal union between...more
Although the decision of the United States Supreme Court in United States v. Windsor invalidating much of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) affects at most approximately 20% of the population of the United States, it has...more
On June 26, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court (the “Court”) issued two decisions, finding that federal and California laws on same-sex marriages are unconstitutional. These decisions will have far-reaching and wide-ranging...more
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled last week that the Defense of Marriage Act’s (DOMA) definition of marriage is unconstitutional. The Court's decision and the decisions allowing same-sex marriage to resume in California will have...more
On June 26, 2013, the United States Supreme Court held that the Defense of Marriage Act (known as DOMA) is unconstitutional. What does this mean for your company’s employee benefit plans?...more
The ruling on Wednesday by the Supreme Court of the United States, that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional, will immediately extend to legally married same-sex couples a host of federal...more
On June 26, 2013, in U.S. v. Windsor, the US Supreme Court held the federal Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”) unconstitutional as a violation of the right to liberty found in the due process clause of the 5th Amendment to the...more
On Wednesday, June 26, 2013, the United States Supreme Court (the "Court") issued two significant decisions relating to same-sex marriage, both of which will have far-reaching effects on the design and tax treatment of...more
The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) provides a single definition of marriage, as between one man and one woman, for purposes of all federal laws, including the Internal Revenue Code and ERISA....more
Court's holding makes federal benefits and tax advantages available to same-sex couples but raises further questions. On June 26, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in United States v. Windsor,...more