Monday, March 23, 2009

Drug Liability

"The Supreme Court said drug makers can be sued in state court over alleged defects, even if the Food and Drug Administration has approved a medication's use. The 6-3 ruling undercuts years of business efforts to block state suits over the safety of products from motorcylce brakes to railway cars. ... Companies have long sought to establish federal rules as a single standard trumping state law, and enjoyed a push under the Bush administration to shield industries from negligence suits. ... Writing for the court, Justice John Paul Stevens concluded that Congress saw state liability laws as bolstering, not undercutting the FDA's mission of ensuring drug safety", Jess Bravin at the WSJ, 5 March 2009.

I agree with this ruling, but believe it should have been a 9-0 shutout. As expected, Roberts and Alito paid off for their big business buddies like broken slot machines.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Although I pouted yesterday that I was "anti-lawyerist" I think this is great lawyering stuff...

Ensuring rights to the states... it's a brake on the power of giant enterprises... right on...

What about banks and insurers?

Independent Accountant said...

Anonymous:
The diffusion of power prevents large corporations from effecting a complete takeover of the US. They have to fight in every state house. I'd rather see insurers regulated by the states than the Feds.