The Golden Gate Restaurant Association argues that contributions to San Francisco's Health Access Program under a 2006 ordinance are preempted by ERISA
This case challenges the employer-mandated spending requirement in San Francisco's Health Care Security Ordinance on the basis that the Ordinance is preempted by ERISA. The employer-mandated spending requirement requires covered employers to contribute to their own programs for their employees' healthcare or to contribute required amounts to the city, which are used to finance San Francisco's Health Access Program or HRAs for employees of covered employers.
SPENDING REQUIREMENT
The court held that the funding requirement of the Ordinance was preempted by ERISA because it had an impermissible connection with employee welfare benefit plans.
After the federal district court decision was issued, the City of San Francisco appealed the decision to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. In an opinion published on September 30, 2008, the Ninth Circuit overruled the lower-court decision holding that ERISA does not preempt the employer-mandated spending requirement contained in the Ordinance.
The restaurant association then filed a petition for rehearing en banc, which was ultimately denied. The dissent to the denial for the petition for rehearing, however, notes that the decision puts the Ninth Circuit in conflict with the Fourth Circuit decision, Retail Indus. Leaders Ass'n v. Fielder, 473 F. 3d 180 (4th Cir. 2007), which struck down a comparable law in Maryland in 2007 on the grounds that such law was preempted by ERISA.
Seeking to present the City of San Francisco from implementing the employer-mandated spending requirement, the restaurant association filed an emergency motion with the Supreme Court in March 2009, which was later denied, meaning that the employer spending requirement continues to be in effect. In response to the Ninth Circuit's decision, the restaurant association filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari on June 8, 2009, asking the Supreme Court to overturn the Ninth Circuit's ruling holding that the Ordinance was not preempted by ERISA.
This column is written for informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice.
Barry Senterfitt is a managing shareholder at Greenberg Traurig, LLP, Austin, Texas.
Janet Farrer is an associate at Greenberg Traurig LLP, Austin, Texas.
Optimize Your Healthcare Payments with Optum Financial
April 29th 2025Discover how Optum Financial is revolutionizing healthcare payments in our latest whitepaper. Learn how transitioning to electronic payments can reduce administrative costs, streamline claims processing and enhance security.
Read More
Conversations With Perry and Friends
April 14th 2025Perry Cohen, Pharm.D., a longtime member of the Managed Healthcare Executive editorial advisory board, is host of the Conversations with Perry and Friends podcast. His guest this episode is John Baackes, the former CEO of L.A. Care Health Plan.
Listen
Healthcare hasn't been a priority of the second Trump administration so far, panelists at the Asembia agreed. Medicaid may loom large, though, as the administration and congressional Republicans look for ways to slash government spending as a way of offsetting major tax cuts.
Read More
Breaking Down Health Plans, HSAs, AI With Paul Fronstin of EBRI
November 19th 2024Featured in this latest episode of Tuning In to the C-Suite podcast is Paul Fronstin, director of health benefits research at EBRI, who shed light on the evolving landscape of health benefits with editors of Managed Healthcare Executive.
Listen
What 5 Managed Care Trends Experts Say You’re Not Watching Closely Enough
April 29th 2025Managed Healthcare Executive asked several experts in healthcare and managed care to share the trends they think the industry is overlooking. From rising costs and data challenges to shifts in how care is delivered, these are the issues that could have a major impact — and deserve a closer look.
Read More