1、1 538 U.S. 329 (2003)2 Id. at 339-340.3 Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. 304.17A-270, 304.17A-271.Congressional Research Service The Library of CongressCRS Report for CongressReceived through the CRS WebOrder Code RS21497Updated January 6, 2005 Reconciling McCarran-Ferguson (Insurance)Case Law and ERISA Preempti
2、on: KentuckyAssn of Health Plans, Inc. v. Millername redactedLegislative AttorneyAmerican Law DivisionSummaryIn Kentucky Assn of Health Plans, Inc. v. Miller,1 the Supreme Court ruled thatKentuckys “any willing provider” statutes, which mandate that health plans and healthinsurers may not exclude fr
3、om their networks any health-care providers that agree to theplans participation terms, are not preempted by ERISA; as statutes that regulate and arespecifically directed toward the insurance industry they are exempted from suchpreemption by the “savings” clause in ERISA, which precludes preemption
4、for statelaws that “regulate . insurance, banking, or securities.” Rejecting plaintiffs arguments grounded in case law interpreting the McCarran-Ferguson Acts antitrust exemptionfor the “business of insurance” that the Kentucky laws, because they also reachhealth-care providers, are not specifically
升级VIP 