| Bowen v. Georgetown University Hospital | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued October 11, 1988 Decided December 12, 1988 | |
| Full case name | Otis R. Bowen, Secretary of Health and Human Services v. Georgetown University Hospital, et al. |
| Docket no. | 87-1097 |
| Citations | 488 U.S. 204 (more) 109 S. Ct. 468; 102 L. Ed. 2d 493; 1988 U.S. LEXIS 5554; 57 U.S.L.W.4057 |
| Decision | Opinion |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Judgment for plaintiff hospitals, 698 F. Supp. 290 (D.D.C. 1987); affirmed, 821 F.2d 750 (D.C. Cir. 1987); certiorari granted, 485 U.S. 903 (1988). |
| Holding | |
| The cost-limit rule imposed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services is invalid because statutory grants of rulemaking authority should not be read to authorize the promulgation of retroactive rules unless expressly conveyed. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Kennedy, joined by unanimous |
| Concurrence | Scalia |
| Laws applied | |
| Medicare Act Administrative Procedure Act | |
Bowen v. Georgetown University Hospital, 488 U.S. 204 (1988), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that agencies should not be presumed to have the power to promulgate retroactive rules unless that power is expressly authorized by Congress.[1] Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for a unanimous court that the Secretary of Health and Human Services had exceeded his rulemaking authority under the Medicare Act in promulgating a wage index rule in 1984 under which he would recoup Medicare reimbursements paid to hospitals, including Georgetown University Hospital, that had been disbursed since 1981 according to the pre-1984 rule. Justice Antonin Scalia concurred in the judgment, writing separately that, in addition to the particular language of the Medicare Act, the Administrative Procedure Act more broadly prohibits retroactive rulemaking because it defines rules as having exclusively future effect, as opposed to adjudicative orders.