• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Supreme Court rejects limits on drug lawsuits

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,602
Reaction score
26,256
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The Supreme Court has rejected limiting consumers lawsuits against drug manufacturers.

The surprise in the case is Clarence Thomas, who sided with John Paul Stevens, who wrote the majority opinion. Quite a surprise there. Nevertheless, I still disagree with the decision. The labeling on the drug in question plainly showed a warning. If anyone should have been sued, it should have been the doctor for improperly administering the drug.

Article is here.
 
Nevertheless, I still disagree with the decision. The labeling on the drug in question plainly showed a warning. If anyone should have been sued, it should have been the doctor for improperly administering the drug.

It seems that you disagree with the law because the ruling as I understand it was reasonable. The courts stated that there is no law that provides pre-emption of such consumer lawsuits, as there are in other areas. Had the courts ruled otherwise they would be writing new laws

The central issue in this case was the absence of language in the federal law setting out regulation of prescription drugs that forecloses consumer complaints in state courts. Congress has included such language in other areas.

"Unless Congress has spoken directly to the question, the court this term has said it is not going to favor broader arguments for pre-emption," said David Frederick, who represented Levine and the cigarette smokers who won an earlier ruling this term allowing their lawsuits against tobacco companies to proceed.
 
Back
Top Bottom