Par Pharmaceutical vs USA - Off-Label Promotion and the First Amendment

more+
less-

Par filed suit seeking a judgment declaring FDA’s regulations unconstitutional and preventing FDA from deeming lawful First Amendment protected speech as evidence of criminal intent. In response, FDA is seeking early dismissal, not addressing the First Amendment issues, but on grounds that the claims are not ripe because ipse dixit of FDA concludes that the conduct Par complains of in its complaint “would not establish Par’s objective intent” of criminal conduct. But FDA cites no statute, regulation or guidance to explain this conclusion. While FDA may be comfortable relying on enforcement discretion as a guiding principle, manufacturers are left with uncertainty. It is not yet clear whether this case will reach the important First Amendment issues it raises. What is clear is that significant constitutional challenges remain unresolved and FDA's intrasigence suggests that the issues will remain unresolved until a court or congress provides much needed clarity to this area of the law.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.


DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Michael Walsh | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

more+
less-

Michael Walsh on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
×
Loading...
×
×