Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/16pdf/16-149_6jfm.pdf
Page Number: 4.0

Cite as:  581 U. S. ____ (2017) 

1 

Opinion of the Court 

NOTICE:  This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the
preliminary  print  of  the  United  States  Reports.  Readers  are  requested  to
notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Wash-
ington,  D. C.  20543,  of  any  typographical  or  other  formal  errors,  in  order
that corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

No. 16–149 
_________________ 

COVENTRY HEALTH CARE OF MISSOURI, INC., FKA 

GROUP HEALTH PLAN, INC., PETITIONER v.
 
JODIE NEVILS 

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF 

MISSOURI
 

[April 18, 2017] 

JUSTICE GINSBURG delivered the opinion of the Court. 
In  the  Federal  Employees  Health  Benefits  Act  of  1959
(FEHBA), 5 U. S. C. §8901 et seq., Congress authorized the 
Office  of  Personnel  Management  (OPM)  to  contract  with
private  carriers  for  federal  employees’  health  insurance. 
§8902(a),  (d).  FEHBA  contains  a  provision  expressly 
preempting state law.  §8902(m)(1).  That provision reads: 

“The  terms  of  any  contract  under  this  chapter  which 
relate to the nature, provision, or extent of coverage or 
benefits (including payments with respect to benefits) 
shall supersede and preempt any State or local law, or 
any  regulation  issued  thereunder,  which  relates  to 
health insurance or plans.” 

Contracts  OPM  negotiates  with  private  carriers  provide 
for  reimbursement  and  subrogation.    Reimbursement 
requires an insured employee who receives payment from 
another  source  (e.g.,  the  proceeds  yielded  by  a  tort  claim) 
to  return  healthcare  costs  earlier  paid  out  by  the  carrier.
Subrogation involves transfer of the right to a third-party
payment  from  the  insured  employee  to  the  carrier,  who