The U.S. Supreme Court today y in favor of the AHA and others, reversing a 2020 court of appeals decision upholding the authority of the Department of Health and Human Services to significantly cut payments to certain hospitals that participate in the 340B Drug Pricing Program, and thereby threatening access to care for patients. 

The Supreme Court held that 鈥淗HS鈥檚 2018 and 2019 reimbursement rates for 340B hospitals were contrary to the statute and unlawful.鈥 Noting that 鈥340B hospitals perform valuable services for low-income and rural communities but have to rely on limited federal funding for support,鈥 the Supreme Court observed that 鈥渢his case has immense economic consequences, about $1.6 billion annually.鈥 

Despite those serious practical impacts, the Supreme Court concluded that 鈥淸u]nder the text and structure of the statute,鈥 the case is 鈥渟traightforward鈥 as a matter of law: 鈥淏ecause HHS did not conduct a survey of hospitals鈥 acquisition costs, HHS acted unlawfully by reducing the reimbursement rates for 340B hospitals.鈥    

The AHA was joined in the case by the Association of American Medical Colleges, America's Essential Hospitals and three hospital members.

In a statement following the decision, the AHA, AAMC and AEH said, 鈥淲e are pleased that the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously agreed with us that the Department of Health and Human Services鈥 outpatient payment cuts to hospitals in the 340B Drug Pricing Program were unlawful. This decision is a decisive victory for vulnerable communities and the hospitals on which so many patients depend. 340B discounts help hospitals devote more resources to services and programs for vulnerable communities and increase access to prescription drugs for low-income patients. Now that the Supreme Court has ruled, we look forward to working with the Administration and the courts to develop a plan to reimburse 340B hospitals affected by these unlawful cuts while ensuring the remainder of the hospital field is not disadvantaged as they also continue to serve their communities.鈥
 

Related News Articles

Headline
The AHA June 16 released a report showing hospitals that participated in the 340B Drug Pricing Program are not only subject to disproportionately greater鈥
Chairperson's File
Public
Advocacy is such an important part of what we do as hospitals and health systems 鈥 and what the AHA does on behalf of our field 鈥 to help ensure that we get鈥
Headline
The AHA June 4 filed an amicus brief in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee in defense of the state鈥檚 340B contract pharmacy law鈥
Headline
A U.S. district court judge for the District of Columbia May 15 ruled the Department of Health and Human Services must preapprove the use of 340B 鈥渞ebate鈥
Headline
The AHA May 14 filed an amicus brief in the U.S. District Court for the District of South Dakota in defense of the state鈥檚 340B contract pharmacy law鈥
Headline
The AHA May 9 urged the Department of Health and Human Services to deny drug companies鈥 requests to approve their unlawful 340B rebate models. 鈥淭he 340B鈥