Drug Makers Near an Old Goal: A Legal Shield
source: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/06/washington/06patch.html?hp
-
-
- aburk72
- added this
This legal argument is called pre-emption. After decades of being dismissed by courts, the tactic now appears to be on the verge of success, lawyers for plaintiffs and drug companies say.
The Bush administration has argued strongly in favor of the doctrine, which holds that the F.D.A. is the only agency with enough expertise to regulate drug makers and that its decisions should not be second-guessed by courts. The Supreme Court is to rule on a case next term that could make pre-emption a legal standard for drug cases. The court already ruled in February that many suits against the makers of medical devices like pacemakers are pre-empted.
The Bush administration has argued strongly in favor of the doctrine, which holds that the F.D.A. is the only agency with enough expertise to regulate drug makers and that its decisions should not be second-guessed by courts. The Supreme Court is to rule on a case next term that could make pre-emption a legal standard for drug cases. The court already ruled in February that many suits against the makers of medical devices like pacemakers are pre-empted.
-
- groups:
- News and Politics, Politics, Law
-
- tags:
- News and Politics, Politics, Law, drug laws
-
-
ocanada
-
But this simply does not work! This goes for every medical mistake, for imported drugs from China that contain lead or arsenic, for Eli Lilly vaccines containing mercury one of the leading causes of autism, this goes against the idea of safeguarding patients from medical incidents, the same type of safegaurds that exist for food products within the FDA, this is like moving back to the 1800's.
I hope that Bush hasn't destroyed the courts for a generation, because these cronies vote corporarions over people every chance they get. Dispicable.
- 4 years ago
-
ocanada
