The Supreme Court is hearing arguments in Sorrell v. IMS Health case, which has to do with the State of Vermont placing limitations on so called “data mining.” The Vermont law at issue limits or prevents the sale of information about doctors' prescribing tendencies without the doctors' permission. One of the most talked-about features of this case is the First Amendment issues raised by the fact that the law appears to limit the ability of brand-name drug companies to be use restricted information in their marketing, while placing no similar restrictions on advocates of generic medicines, including the state, insurance companies and others who favor the increased use of cheaper, non-name brand drugs. The questions and statements from the Supreme Court Justices appear to suggest that they think the law is an unconstitutional limitation on speech, but sometimes the Justices are particularly harsh on advocates to get them to state their best case clearly. We likely won’t know how the Justices really view the matter until the opinion comes out, which is expected to be around June of this year.
North Carolina, especially Raleigh, Durham and RTP, will be following this story with interest, given the number of pharmaceutical companies and related institutions based in our area. While current North Carolina law will not be directly affected by the Court’s ruling, it will undoubtedly shape future legislation on this topic, in North Carolina and across the nation.
If you have comments or questions about this blog post we invite you to submit your comments below. If you are in Durham, Chapel Hill, Raleigh, or anywhere in North Carolina and have questions about a legal matter you may contact the Taibi Kornbluth Law Group directly at contact@taibikornbluth.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment