{
  "id": "RS21497",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "RS21497",
  "active": false,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 103019,
      "date": "2005-01-06",
      "retrieved": "2016-04-07T19:59:15.579412",
      "title": "Reconciling McCarran-Ferguson (Insurance) Case Law and ERISA Preemption: Kentucky Ass'n of Health Plans, Inc. v. Miller",
      "summary": "In  Kentucky Ass'n of Health Plans, Inc. v. Miller,   (1)  the\nSupreme Court ruled that Kentucky's \"any\nwilling provider\" statutes, which mandate that health plans and health insurers may not exclude from\ntheir networks any health-care providers that agree to the plans' participation terms, are not\npreempted by ERISA; as statutes that regulate and are specifically directed toward the insurance\nindustry they are exempted from such preemption by the \"savings\" clause in ERISA, which\nprecludes preemption for state laws that \"regulate ... insurance, banking, or securities.\" Rejecting\nplaintiffs' arguments -- grounded in case law interpreting the McCarran-Ferguson Act's antitrust\nexemption for the \"business of insurance\" -- that the Kentucky laws, because they also reach\nhealth-care providers, are not 'specifically directed toward' insurers, and do not regulate insurance\npractices, the Court reconsidered and rejected prior judicial reliance upon McCarran-Ferguson case\nlaw as a guide to interpreting ERISA's applicability to and preemption of state laws purporting to\ndeal with insurance. The Court emphasizes the distinction between the  conduct of private\nparties \nthat is the focus of McCarran-Ferguson interpretation and the  state laws  that are the\nsubject of the\ncurrent litigation to conclude that \"our use of the McCarran-Ferguson case law in the ERISA context\nhas misdirected attention, failed to provide clear guidance to the lower federal courts, and ... added\nlittle to the relevant analysis.\"  (2)  \n     1.  \u00a0538 U.S.  329 (2003)\n  2.  \u00a0 Id . at 339-340.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/RS21497",
          "sha1": "3007dd0a2eab6e44119b46204df33a3b74d960e3",
          "filename": "files/20050106_RS21497_3007dd0a2eab6e44119b46204df33a3b74d960e3.pdf",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "filename": "files/20050106_RS21497_3007dd0a2eab6e44119b46204df33a3b74d960e3.html"
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "American Law",
    "Domestic Social Policy"
  ]
}