MMA Comments on Proposed Changes to the Interstate Medical Licensure Compact Rule
September 22, 2022
On September 20, the MMA submitted comments in support of proposed changes to Chapter 6 of the administrative rule, which clarifies the Interstate Medical Licensure Compact (IMLC).
The recent overturning of Roe. v. Wade, as a result of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization and subsequent state actions, resulted in inconsistency among state medical practice acts - legal action in one state now being illegal in another. This inconsistency raised many concerns with the IMLC, which was developed to provide an expedited pathway to licensure for physicians who already had a license in good standing in one state and who were seeking licensure in another.
When the IMLC was formed, much effort was put into transparency and communication between state medical boards that were members of the IMLC. This was done to ensure that all states where a physician was licensed would be notified of any adverse actions taken against that physician in another member state. As part of this work, the IMLC Rule contained requirements for all member states to act against a physician licensed through the IMLC if that physician had action taken against their license in their state of principal licensure.
To help alleviate concerns and support state sovereignty, the IMLC commission has proposed amendments to the IMLC Rule clarifying that one member state cannot direct the actions of another member state against a licensee and that each member state has the discretion to choose when and how to discipline a licensee. There were additional amendments made to clarify that the IMLC does not authorize one member state to issue a subpoena for the appearance of a witness or testimony against a licensee for actions that are legal in that member state.
MMA submitted comments in support of the proposed amendments by the IMLC Commission and requested additional amendments to clarify that a physician is only subject to the laws of the state in which the patient is located at the time of care.
Proposed amendments can be found here.
MMA comments can be found here.
News
MMA Comments on Proposed Changes to the Interstate Medical Licensure Compact Rule
September 22, 2022
On September 20, the MMA submitted comments in support of proposed changes to Chapter 6 of the administrative rule, which clarifies the Interstate Medical Licensure Compact (IMLC).
The recent overturning of Roe. v. Wade, as a result of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization and subsequent state actions, resulted in inconsistency among state medical practice acts - legal action in one state now being illegal in another. This inconsistency raised many concerns with the IMLC, which was developed to provide an expedited pathway to licensure for physicians who already had a license in good standing in one state and who were seeking licensure in another.
When the IMLC was formed, much effort was put into transparency and communication between state medical boards that were members of the IMLC. This was done to ensure that all states where a physician was licensed would be notified of any adverse actions taken against that physician in another member state. As part of this work, the IMLC Rule contained requirements for all member states to act against a physician licensed through the IMLC if that physician had action taken against their license in their state of principal licensure.
To help alleviate concerns and support state sovereignty, the IMLC commission has proposed amendments to the IMLC Rule clarifying that one member state cannot direct the actions of another member state against a licensee and that each member state has the discretion to choose when and how to discipline a licensee. There were additional amendments made to clarify that the IMLC does not authorize one member state to issue a subpoena for the appearance of a witness or testimony against a licensee for actions that are legal in that member state.
MMA submitted comments in support of the proposed amendments by the IMLC Commission and requested additional amendments to clarify that a physician is only subject to the laws of the state in which the patient is located at the time of care.
Proposed amendments can be found here.
MMA comments can be found here.
More Publications
Latest News
Physician/Olympian to Give Inspirational Address at Empowering Physicians Event
August 20, 2026
A physician and Olympian will give an inspirational address as part of this year's Empowering Physicians event on Friday, September 25, at the Minneapolis Institute of Art.
Minnesota Vaccination Rates Trending in Wrong Direction
August 20, 2026
Minnesota received some disturbing news this week from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), as data shows that for the 2025-2026 school year, vaccination rates decreased and non-medical exemptions increased.
Appellate Court Sides with Texas Medical Association in No Suprises Act Lawsuit
August 20, 2026
On August 11, a federal appellate court sided with the Texas Medical Association (TMA) argument that the way the No Surprises Act’s qualifying payment amount (QPA) is calculated has historically favored payers in arbitration.