Coalition Lawsuit Prompts “Fresh and Critical” Review

Coalition Lawsuit Prompts “Fresh and Critical” Review and Potential Repeal of Dangerous Trump-Era ‘Sunset Rule’

Biden-Harris Administration Postponed Effective Date in the “Interests of Justice”, Now Says It Anticipates Proposing Repeal of Trump’s Sunset Rule

San José, C.A. April 26, 2021 — In a court filing responding to a recent lawsuit filed by local government, associations, and non-profit organizations, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced that it “anticipates issuing, in the coming months, a notice of proposed rulemaking repealing the SUNSET Rule.”  The Rule— proposed and finalized in the Trump administration’s lame-duck period — would have set a ticking time bomb on more than 18,000 crucial regulations issued by HHS and its sub-agencies.

“We filed suit to stem the regulatory chaos that would ensue if the Sunset Rule ever saw the light of day,” said Democracy Forward Senior Counsel Samara Spence. “We applaud the Biden-Harris administration for taking a serious look at the legal flaws in the Rule, and we hope to see the administration act promptly to make good on its commitment to public health protections and to a lawful, transparent regulatory process.”

“As the pandemic continues to impact our nation and pediatric health disparities increase, the National Association of Pediatric Nurse Practitioners applauds the administration’s plan to repeal the SUNSET Rule,” said National Association of Pediatric Nurse Practitioners President Dr. Jessica Peck. “HHS must focus on improving health outcomes based on the latest evidence-based research and supporting the health care workforce which has been emotionally and physically affected by the pandemic.”

Citing the groups’ lawsuit, the Biden-Harris administration previously delayed the Sunset Rule’s effective date by one year to March 22, 2022.  In doing so, HHS found:

  • That the “interests of justice require a postponement in order to preserve the status quo, because, if the rule took effect while HHS was evaluating the rule in light of the claims raised in litigation, it could create significant obligations for HHS, cause confusion for the public, including Plaintiffs…”;
  • That the agency found the uncertainty caused by the rule “could have serious implications for insurance markets, hospitals, physicians, and patients, among other affected parties”;
  • That it had determined that allowing the rule to take effect would require HHS and the Food and Drug Administration “to immediately divert resources … during the ongoing COVID-19 public health emergency,” significantly impacting “actions to address urgent public health matters such as ongoing COVID-19 pandemic relief efforts, outbreaks of foodborne illness, inspections, recalls, and other public health priorities”; and
  • That “based on HHS’s initial review of the Complaint, HHS believes that the Court could find merit in some of Plaintiffs’ claims,” that the automatic expiration of HHS regulations through this kind of rule raises serious legal questions, and that HHS procedures used to issue the rule “may have impeded the full and deliberate consideration of all the potential issues related to” the Rule.

The County of Santa Clara, the California Tribal Families Coalition (CTFC), the National Association of Pediatric Nurse Practitioners (NAPNAP), the American Lung Association, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), and NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council) filed a lawsuit over the Sunset Rule on March 9 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Democracy Forward is litigating the case as counsel for all Plaintiffs, alongside legal teams from the County of Santa Clara, NRDC, and CSPI.

Democracy Forward is litigating the case as counsel for all Plaintiffs, alongside legal teams from the County of Santa Clara, NRDC, and CSPI. Read the complaint in full here. Learn more about the lawsuit here.

Powered by Americaneagle.com

Website design and development by Americaneagle.com, Inc.