Facts of the Case
In 2007, the Vermont legislature passed a law that banned the sale, transmission or use of prescriber-identifiable data (''PI data'') for marketing or promoting a prescription drug without the consent of the prescriber. The law also prohibited the sale, license or exchange for value of PI data for marketing or promoting a prescription drug.
Three companies -- IMS Health, Verispan and Source Healthcare Analytics, a unit of Dutch publisher Wolters Kluwer -- that collect and sell such data and by a trade group for pharmaceutical manufacturers challenged the law. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit struck down the measure, holding that it violated the First Amendment because it restricts the speech rights of data miners without directly advancing legitimate state interests.
Questions
Does a Vermont state statute banning the sale, transmission or use of prescriber-identifiable data, absent prescriber consent, unconstitutionally restrict the free speech rights of pharmaceutical research companies, manufacturers and others to use that data?
Conclusions
-
Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court order in an opinion by Justice Anthony Kennedy. "Vermont's statute, which imposes content-and speaker-based burdens on protected expression, is subject to heightened judicial scrutiny," Kennedy wrote. Meanwhile, Justice Stephen Breyer dissented, joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan. "The First Amendment does not require courts to apply a special 'heightened' standard of review when reviewing such an effort," Breyer wrote. "And, in any event, the statute meets the First Amendment standard this Court has previously applied when the government seeks to regulate commercial speech."
Fourth Circuit Recognizes Free Speech Concerns with Voter List Access Restrictions
On July 12, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit...
Licensing Speech & Regulating the Internet: Tennessee’s Auctioneer Licensing Scheme
(NIFLA v. Becerra: A huge First Amendment win or a lofty ideal lower courts will simply ignore?)
This spring the Tennessee legislature substantially broadened the sweep of its auctioneering license, with an...
Compelled Speech in Masterpiece Cakeshop: What the Supreme Court’s June 2018 Decisions Tell Us About the Unresolved Questions
Federalist Society Review, Volume 19
Note from the Editor: This article discusses the unresolved compelled-speech questions in Masterpiece Cakeshop v....
Business Cases and the Roberts Supreme Court
Engage Volume 12, Issue 3, November 2011
The statement that the Supreme Court under Chief Justice Roberts, and more specifically the Court...
