Metal shield with map of Delaware painted on it.

Delaware Joins Shield-Law States, Bars Insurer “Adverse Actions” Over Protected Care

August 1, 2025

Delaware has passed HB 205, expanding the state’s post-Dobbs “shield” protections and adding a notable insurance clause: insurers may not take “adverse action” against a health-care professional or organization because they provided health care that is lawful in Delaware—even if the patient lives in a state where that care is restricted. The law amends multiple code titles, including insurance, and—via House Amendment 1—broadens the scope from reproductive-only language to “healthcare services” generally. ‍

With HB 205, Delaware joins states including New York, Massachusetts, Colorado, Maine, and Vermont, which already bar malpractice carriers (and, in some cases, other insurers) from canceling, non-renewing, surcharging, or otherwise penalizing providers for delivering in-state lawful, protected care—often explicitly covering telehealth to out-of-state patients. New York’s Insurance Law §3436-a prohibits “adverse action” by med-mal insurers; Massachusetts’ 2022 shield law and 2025 update strengthen parallel protections; Colorado’s SB 23-188 restricts both malpractice and health-plan actions; Maine’s LD 227 forbids med-mal discrimination based on protected care; and Vermont’s H.89/S.37 package includes med-mal insurer limits.

Our team is your team.

Get a quote

Why this matters for insurers and brokers.

‍For medical professional liability writers, Delaware’s standard narrows acceptable underwriting rationales: carriers can still rate on neutral, evidence-based factors—loss history, procedure mix, volume, risk controls—but cannot link adverse action to the fact that a clinician provides Delaware-lawful care to out-of-state residents. Expect regulators to scrutinize applications, declination codes, and rating notes for compliance. For multi-line programs (e.g., package, D&O, cyber) that insure provider entities, the amendment’s broader “healthcare services” phrasing signals caution across lines, not just MPL. HB 205 also tightens Delaware’s stance on out-of-state investigations and judgments arising from care that is lawful in Delaware, reinforcing venue and enforceability defenses for providers and their carriers—even as cross-border suits remain possible.

‍

Bottom line

‍Delaware’s move aligns it with a multi-state shield trend, reducing insurer discretion to penalize protected care and shifting the focus back to traditional risk metrics and documentation—while strengthening defense leverage inside Delaware courts. ‍