Hospitals argue that negotiated rates vary from one insurer to another, and creating one list with all of the unique charges would be overly burdensome. (Photo: Shutterstock)

Despite the current chaos in our health care system, reform efforts–and counter-efforts–march on. A U.S. District Court on Thursday heard arguments from the American Hospital Association and other industry groups challenging the Health and Human Services Department's much-hyped price transparency rule, currently on track to take effect in January 2021.

The rule would require hospitals to post negotiated rates for various procedures, giving consumers a clearer idea of how much their care will cost. Hospitals argue that the rule creates an undue burden, is a violation of their First Amendment rights and doesn't fall within the power of the HHS to enforce.

Related: Negotiated hospital rates in crosshairs of Trump administration

Cate Stetson, an attorney advocating on behalf of the health systems argued that negotiated rates are a private matter between the health system and health insurers and they should not be compelled to make it public. Moreover, because these negotiations vary from one insurer to another, creating one list with all of the unique charges would be overly burdensome.

U.S. Department of Justice Attorney Michael Baer countered by pointing out that the rule was in the public's best interest and drive market competition.

"Patients deserve to know how much it's going to cost when they get hospital care," Baer said. "They deserve to know before they open a medical bill or before they choose where they want to receive care."

The judge did not side with either party during the hearing but is expected to rule quickly, given the January 2021 implementation date.

Read more: 

• Health industry speaks out against CMS transparency rule
• How will the CMS's new health care price transparency rule play out?
• CMS may lack authority to compel hospitals to tell negotiated prices