On Friday, May 9, 2025, the Departments of Labor, Treasury, and Health and Human Services asked the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to pause the lawsuit brought by the ERISA Industry Committee (ERIC) challenging the final Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (MHPAEA) regulation.[1]
The District Court agreed to stay the litigation and ordered that the departments file a status report every 90 days starting on August 7, 2025, reporting on their progress in reconsidering the final regulation. Note that ERIC can ask the court to resume litigation at any time.
As background, in January 2025, ERIC filed a lawsuit challenging the final regulation. Specifically, ERIC claimed that the Departments had exceeded their statutory authority with the new mental health and substance use disorder parity requirements.
On May 15, 2025, the Departments issued a statement regarding enforcement of the 2024 MHPAEA Final Rule. In the statement, the Departments confirm that they will not enforce any new requirements imposed by the 2024 rule until a final court ruling on a lawsuit challenging certain provisions of the 2024 rule — plus an additional 18 months. The Departments clarified that the provisions of the final 2013 MHPAEA regulations remain in effect, and plan sponsors still have an obligation to produce non-quantitative treatment limitations (NQTLs) comparative analyses as required by the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (CAA).
While this non-enforcement statement provides some relief for group health plan sponsors, the Departments note that they remain committed to ensuring individuals receive protections under the MHPAEA. To that end, plan sponsors should continue reviewing their plan designs to ensure compliance under the 2013 rules. This includes analyzing NQTLs and drafting comparative analyses that reflect the CAA statutory requirements. The analyses should demonstrate that the processes, strategies, evidentiary standards and other factors the plan uses in applying an NQTL to mental health and substance use disorder benefits are comparable to and applied no more stringently than those used with respect to medical/surgical benefits.
