McKee Foods Corp. v. BFP Inc.

── McKee Foods Corp. v. BFP Inc. ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit Date: April 07, 2026 Category: General RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 26a0110p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ MCKEE FOODS CORPORATION, │ Plaintiff-Appellee, │ │ v. │ > No. 25-5416 │ BFP INC., │ Defendant, │ │ │ CARTER LAWRENCE, in his official capacity as │ Commissioner of the Tennessee Department of │ Commerce and Insurance, │ Defendant-Appellant. │ ┘ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee at Chattanooga. No. 1:21-cv-00279—Charles Edward Atchley, Jr., District Judge. Argued: December 10, 2025 Decided and Filed: April 7, 2026 Before: McKEAGUE, READLER, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. _________________ COUNSEL ARGUED: Gabriel Krimm, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellant. William H. Pickering, CHAMBLISS, BAHNER & STOPHEL, P.C., Chattanooga, Tennessee, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Gabriel Krimm, Michael N. Wennerlund, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellant. William H. Pickering, Peter A. Newman, CHAMBLISS, BAHNER & STOPHEL, P.C., Chattanooga, Tennessee, Mark E. Schmidtke, OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C., Valparaiso, Indiana, for Appellee. Robert T. Smith, Timothy H. Gray, KATTEN MUCHIN ROSENMAN LLP, Washington, D.C., Cory L. Andrews, WASHINGTON LEGAL FOUNDATION, Washington, D.C., Deborah S. Davidson, MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS  No. 25-5416 McKee Foods Corp. v. BFP Inc., et al. Page 2 LLP, Chicago, Illinois, Michael Kenneally, MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP, Washington, D.C., for Amici Curiae. _________________ OPINION _________________ DAVIS, Circuit Judge. Pharmacy benefit managers—referred to in the industry as PBMs—play a pivotal role in American healthcare. They oversee prescription-drug benefits for health plans, perform administrative services, help negotiate drug rebates, and set up pharmacy networks, working with health plans, drug manufacturers, and pharmacies along the way. But the rise of PBMs has been met with state-level regulation efforts. PBMs often own pharmacies to which they steer significant business, and in the process build a significant market share of the prescription-drug benefit field in a given geographic area. Some policymakers have raised concerns that such practices can lead to the closure of small, rural pharmacies. Citing this policy concern, Tennessee enacted laws to tamp down the PBM practice of steering patients to PBM-managed pharmacies. These laws ban interference with a patient’s choice of pharmacy and restrict the provision of incentives for patients to choose certain pharmacies over others. These restrictions sweep in self-funded health plans that are governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. §