Thus the Feds maintain their position as the One Stop Shop for influence peddling.
Jeep should have stuck to its guns and not issued a recall on vehicles that exceeded all motor vehicle safety standards in place at the time.
-—— a blow to patient safety.-——
A blow to former ambulance chasers who see the drug companies as free money
There should be a counter suit that destroys the lawyer bringing the suit
Oh there you go. That would have been a much better outcome /s
BS lawsuit.
I feel really sorry for this woman, but the SCOTUS decision makes sense to me. Generic drug companies are simply relying on the original FDA approval process, which is based on data submitted by the original drug maker and analyzed by the FDA. Assuming the generic drug is a faithful reproduction (an assumption I question more and more each day regarding many generics), then IF the original approval process faithfully met all of the federal requirements AND there was no skulduggery of any kind regarding faked or cherry-picked data, etc., then to me, this is a common sense ruling.
To me, it would seem the woman would have to prove the original drug company and/or the FDA committed some kind of fraudulent or illegal act regarding this particular horrific side-effect, e.g., they knew about this reaction and covered it up by NOT including it on the list of known reactions.
Insurance companies (soon to be the government) mandates using generics and the knock offs aren’t accountable for the outcomes of dodgey merchandise. Wonderful.
another 5-4 decision.
Just as with constitutionally indefensible Obamacare, I think that official clarifications of the limits of Congress's Commerce clause powers by Thomas Jefferson and case precedent established by Supreme Court show that Justice Alito and other activist majority justices are wrong about this issue imo. More specifically, regardless what FDR's activist justices wanted everybody to believe about Congress's Commerce Clause powers, using terms like "does not extend" and "exclusively," Jefferson had noted that Congress has no business sticking its big nose into intrastate commerce.
“For the power given to Congress by the Constitution does not extend to the internal regulation of the commerce of a State, (that is to say of the commerce between citizen and citizen,) which remain exclusively (emphases added) with its own legislature; but to its external commerce only, that is to say, its commerce with another State, or with foreign nations, or with the Indian tribes.” –Thomas Jefferson, Jefferson’s Opinion on the Constitutionality of a National Bank : 1791."State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress (emphases added)." --Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.