(a) The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(1) The power to make rules regulating the practice of medicine or osteopathy includes the power to prohibit unlicensed persons from practicing medicine or osteopathy and the power to regulate how licensed persons practice medicine or osteopathy.
(2) A primary goal of the provision of health care is to prioritize patient safety and wellness.
(3) The State Board of Medical Examiners and the Medical Licensure Commission are in the best position to determine the medical practices that prioritize patient safety and wellness.
(4) Prioritizing patient safety and wellness may sometimes be at odds with the goals of state and federal anti-trust laws, which include prioritizing competition and efficiency.
(5) It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this section to immunize the Board of Medical Examiners and its members and the Medical Licensure Commission and its members from liability under state and federal anti-trust laws for the adoption of a rule that prioritize patient safety and wellness but may be anti-competitive.
(b) Subject to subsection (c), rules adopted under Sections 34-24-53 and 34-24-311 may define and regulate the practice of medicine or osteopathy in a way that prioritizes patient safety and wellness, even if the rule is anti-competitive.
(c) A rule adopted under Section 34-24-53 or 34-24-311 may supplement or clarify any statutory definition but may not conflict with any statute that defines the practice of medicine or osteopathy, including, but not limited to, Section 34-21-81(4)c.
(d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to constrict or expand the current rights and privileges of any individual governed by the Board of Medical Examiners or the Medical Licensure Commission beyond that which existed prior to the ruling in the United States Supreme Court decision N.C. State Bd. of Dental Examiners v. FTC, 135 S.Ct. 1101(2015).
(e) Nothing in this section shall be construed to constrict or expand the current duties or responsibilities of the members of the Board of Medical Examiners or the Medical Licensure Commission in any context outside of federal or state anti-trust immunity beyond that which existed prior to the ruling in the United States Supreme Court decision N.C. State Bd. of Dental Examiners v. FTC, 135 S.Ct. 1101(2015).
Copyright ©2024 LegalFix. All rights reserved. LegalFix is not a law firm, is not licensed to practice law, and does not provide legal advice, services, or representation. The information on this website is an overview of the legal plans you can purchase—or that may be provided by your employer as an employee benefit or by your credit union or other membership group as a membership benefit.
LegalFix provides its members with easy access to affordable legal services through a network of independent law firms. LegalFix, its corporate entity, and its officers, directors, employees, agents, and contractors do not provide legal advice, services, or representation—directly or indirectly.
The articles and information on the site are not legal advice and should not be relied upon—they are for information purposes only. You should become a LegalFix member to get legal services from one of our network law firms.
You should not disclose confidential or potentially incriminating information to LegalFix—you should only communicate such information to your network law firm.
The benefits and legal services described in the LegalFix legal plans are not always available in all states or with all plans. See the legal plan Benefit Overview and the more comprehensive legal plan contract during checkout for coverage details in your state.
Use of this website, the purchase of legal plans, and access to the LegalFix networks of law firms are subject to the LegalFix Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.