The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear a challenge to a $2.7 billion nationwide class action settlement with Blue Cross Blue Shield over allegations that the insurance giant overcharged commercial and individual subscribers for years.
The justices without comment denied a petition from home improvement retailer Home Depot objecting to the landmark antitrust settlement. The court also declined to hear a related challenge to a $667 million fee award for the class attorneys who negotiated the deal.
The fee amount, which a lower court judge approved, would be among the largest-ever class action attorney awards.
Health insurance subscribers in the decade-long case accused Blue Cross Blue Shield Association and others of unlawfully agreeing not to compete with one another, leading to higher insurance costs. Blue Cross denied any wrongdoing in agreeing to settle the case in 2020.
Home Depot did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Blue Cross in a statement on Monday said it welcomed the justices' rulings "and the opportunity to begin to implement this settlement."
Boies, Schiller & Flexner chairman David Boies, one of the lead class attorneys, in a statement on Monday called the Supreme Court's orders "a great result for consumers and the entire health insurance system."
Boies said "consumers will now receive the billions of dollars of refunds they are due and injunctive relief that will bring increased competition throughout the United States."
Attorneys from law firms Hausfeld and Cooper & Kirk also represent the subscriber class.
Both Supreme Court petitions challenged an order last year by the Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that upheld the settlement.
Home Depot objected to the accord on the grounds that it would restrict future antitrust claims against Blue Cross. The fee objection claimed the amount should be no more than $194 million, based on multiplying the number of hours the lawyers said they worked by a prevailing hourly rate.
Attorneys for a class of 100 million Blue Cross subscribers had urged the justices to turn down both challenges. They argued there was nothing improper about a settlement barring future claims “arising out of the same nucleus of operative fact.”
The cases are Home Depot v. Blue Cross Blue Shield Association, U.S. Supreme Court, No. 23-1063, and David G. Behenna v. Blue Cross Blue Shield Association, same court, No. 23-1163.
