The DOJ filed the case on February 20, 2026, alleging OhioHealth used its market dominance—controlling over 35 percent of inpatient services in greater Columbus—to inflate reimbursement rates through all-or-nothing tying clauses, anti-steering provisions, and gag clauses preventing insurers from sharing cost and quality data with patients. The settlement specifically prohibits OhioHealth from requiring insurers to place it in their most-preferred benefit tier, though the system may still seek such placement voluntarily. The case names the DOJ Antitrust Division and Ohio Attorney General's Office as plaintiffs.
The enforcement action reflects a coordinated Trump administration push against dominant hospital systems. Two days after the settlement filing, the White House Council of Economic Advisors released a report advocating a nationwide ban on anti-steering, anti-tiering, and all-or-nothing contracts, estimating such restrictions could reduce hospital prices by 18 percent and employer health premiums by 6.5 percent in affected markets. A nearly identical suit against NewYork-Presbyterian filed weeks earlier signals this is part of a broader enforcement trend.
Attorneys should treat this settlement as a compliance roadmap. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche emphasized the case as a tool to lower consumer costs, and the coordinated timing with the White House report underscores federal commitment to reforming hospital-insurer contracting. Health systems and insurers nationwide should expect heightened scrutiny of network design restrictions and steerage limitations.