In the 1981 case of Schweiker, Secretary of Health and Human Services v. McClure et al., the United States Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving Medicare reimbursement rates for clinical laboratories. The plaintiffs, a group of independent clinical labs, argued that they were being unfairly compensated by Medicare due to an inequitable formula used by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). They claimed this violated their Fifth Amendment rights as it constituted taking property without just compensation. However, the Supreme Court disagreed with these arguments in a unanimous decision. It held that there was no contractual or statutory entitlement to any specific level of reimbursement under Medicare Part B; thus HHS's method for determining reasonable charges did not constitute "taking" within meaning of Fifth Amendment.

In the dissenting opinion for Schweiker v. McClure, Justice Thurgood Marshall argued that the majority's decision was a misinterpretation of Medicare law and its intent to provide comprehensive health care coverage for senior citizens. He contended that Congress intended to cover all necessary medical services under Medicare Part B, including those provided by clinical psychologists. The majority's narrow interpretation of "reasonable charge" in relation to these services undermined this aim and left many elderly patients without access to vital mental health care. Furthermore, he disagreed with their assertion that excluding clinical psychologists from direct reimbursement did not affect patient access to their services; instead, he believed it created an unnecessary financial burden on patients who could not afford upfront payment or private insurance copayments. Lastly, Justice Marshall criticized the Secretary’s argument about quality control issues as unfounded since state licensing boards already ensured professional standards among practicing psychologists.