When a generic version of a drug comes on the market, the holder of the brand-name drug’s patent stands to see a steep drop in sales as many customers switch to the lower-price option. Thus, some companies will go to great lengths to delay the release of generics. One such method, dubbed “pay-for-delay,” involves the patent-holder suing manufacturers of generics and then settling for millions of dollars with the agreement that the generic suppliers will hold off on releasing their product. Today, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Federal Trade Commission has the right to challenge these sorts of deals. [More]
supreme court
Supreme Court Agrees: Cigarette Warning Labels Don’t Violate Big Tobacco’s Free Speech
By 4.22.13
For the last several years, the tobacco industry has been fighting a federal law that requires, among other restrictions, cigarette manufacturers to place graphic warning labels on packaging. Big Tobacco may need to finally get with the program, now that the U.S. Supreme Court has rejected the companies’ challenge to the law on the grounds that it violates their First Amendment rights. [More]
Supreme Court Says Reselling Books Bought Overseas Does Not Violate Copyright
By 3.19.13
The legality of “gray market” books and other media just got slightly less gray, with the Supreme Court ruling that a person who buys books overseas has the right to resell those books here in the U.S. without violating a publisher’s copyright. [More]
Supreme Court To Decide Whether Companies Can Use Forced Arbitration To Skirt Federal Laws
By 2.27.13
It’s been nearly two years since the Supreme Court slapped U.S. consumers across the face, ruling in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion that companies could take away customers’ rights to class-action lawsuits by including a tiny arbitration clause in user agreements. Today, SCOTUS hears another arbitration case that could shift the balance even further in favor of corporations. [More]
Supreme Court Sides With Homeowner: Just Because It Floats Doesn’t Mean It’s A Boat
By 1.16.13
It’s always fun when judges get a bit creative in how they phrase decisions, and in the case of a fight over whether a floating home counts as a boat, and would therefore be regulated under federal admiralty laws, the U.S. Supreme Court got pretty sassy. The court sided with the owner of a floating home, saying just because it floats, doesn’t make it a boat. [More]
Supreme Court Upholds Corporations’ Right To Unlimited Campaign Spending
By 6.25.12
It’s been two years since the U.S. Supreme Court issued its ruling in the Citizens United v. Federal Election Committee case and declared that limiting corporate spending on political campaigns is a violation of businesses’ right to free expression. Today, the Supremes affirmed that controversial decision by striking down a 100-year-old Montana law that capped spending on state-level elections. [More]
Supreme Court Says FCC’s Indecency Policy Could Use A *#@ing Revision
By 6.21.12
While the Supreme Court has previously sided with the Federal Communications Commission over its decision to ramp up its enforcement of indecency rules, today it ruled that the FCC screwed up when it decided to start slapping mammoth fines on broadcasters without warning. [More]
Turns Out That Forcing Customers Into Arbitration Is Not Good For Consumers
By 4.25.12
A year ago this week, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling in the AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion case. It decided that a company could force customers into arbitration — and effectively pre-empt any class-action lawsuits — by including a tiny clause in their contracts. At the time, AT&T had the gall to claim that this was all for the benefit of you, the consumer, but a new study proves what you probably already guessed: AT&T was full of it. [More]
Supreme Court Decides At Least Some NYC Apartments Will Remain Affordable
By 4.23.12
For more than 40 years, finding a rent-stabilized apartment in New York City has been like winning the lottery. Earlier this morning, the U.S. Supreme Court shot down a challenge to the rent-stabilization regulations, meaning at least a million city residents will continue to pay rent that is only a fraction of what their neighbors pay [More]
Health Care Reform Makes Its Supreme Court Debut Today
By 3.26.12
When the president signed the Affordable Care Act into law, it was pretty clear that the legislation would ultimately be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. And now, two years later, the Supremes will be hearing its first arguments on the matter. [More]
Supreme Court Limits EPA's Ability To Enforce Clean Water Act
By 3.21.12
Earlier today, the Supreme Court issued a ruling in a case that has been a hot-button topic for both environmentalists and advocates for the rights of land owners. In the end, the Supremes came down on the side of landowners, allowing them to take legal steps to void Environmental Protection Agency compliance orders. [More]
Supreme Court Sets Late March Dates To Hear Health Care Reform Arguments
By 12.19.11
The countdown clock is on for health care reform. This morning, the Supreme Court announced that it has set aside three dates in late March to hear arguments surrounding the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. [More]
Supreme Court Agrees To Hear Health Care Reform Case
By 11.14.11
We all knew this was going to happen; it was just a matter of when. Today, the Supreme Court announced it would hear the appeals in the case to strike down — at least in part — the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. [More]
DOJ Petitions Supreme Court To Review Health Care Challenge
By 9.29.11
It was inevitable that it would come to this; it was just a matter of which side would make the request first. Yesterday, the Dept. of Justice filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the nine robed ones to review the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional. [More]
Supreme Court Does Something That Makes Sense, Strikes Down Law Banning Sale Of Violent Games To Kids
By 6.27.11
So far this session, the Supreme Court has basically guaranteed a future filled with mandatory binding arbitration, said it’s completely cool for drug companies to data mine prescription records and blocked a mammoth class-action suit against Walmart. So they were due to do something that made sense. [More]
Supreme Court: Data Mining Of Prescription Drug Records Is Free Speech
By 6.23.11
In 2007, the state of Vermont passed a law forbidding the data mining of prescription drug records (i.e., which drugs are being prescribed and how frequently) for marketing purposes. But earlier today, the Supreme Court ruled that the Vermont law interferes with drug makers’ right to free speech. [More]
AT&T: Mandatory Binding Arbitration Actually Benefits The Consumer
By 4.27.11
Earlier today, the Supreme Court ruled that it’s okay for companies to effectively preempt class-action lawsuits by putting mandatory binding arbitration clauses into their contracts with consumers. To most of us, that looks like a slap in the face to the American consumer, but the folks at AT&T want us all to know that the Supreme Court decision is actually going to benefit us all. [More]
Supreme Court Rules That Companies Can Block Customers' Class-Action Suits
By 4.27.11
In a huge blow to peeved consumers, the Supreme Court ruled earlier today that companies can block customers from joining together in a class-action suit by forcing each complaint into arbitration.
