- Docket No.
- 24-1019
- Appellate Court
- Eighth Circuit
Goal
- Block enforcement of a law
- Declaration that a law is unlawful
Issues
Case History
Litigation Content
Why this Matters:
The plaintiff argues that a Minnesota law prohibiting generic drug manufacturers from excessively increasing prices violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as well as the Dormant Commerce Clause. Price gouging laws are one approach states are currently pursuing to lower prescription drug costs for their residents.
Potential Impact:
The inability for state policymakers to address prescription drug affordability could negate savings for patients, and more broadly restrict state regulatory authority in the health care arena.
News And Analysis (2)
21 Major Filings
- MANDATE (Aug 8, 2025)
- ORDER ON PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC (Aug 1, 2025)
- DEFENDANT'S PETITION FOR REHEARING OR REHEARING EN BANC (Jul 10, 2025)
- JUDGMENT (Jun 12, 2025)
- OPINION (Jun 12, 2025)
- PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY (Mar 21, 2025)
- DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY (Mar 19, 2025)
- DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY (Feb 26, 2025)
- PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY (Feb 24, 2025)
- PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY (Oct 16, 2024)
- DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY (Oct 10, 2024)
- SCHEDULING ORDER (Jun 23, 2024)
- DEFENDANT'S REPLY BRIEF (May 6, 2024)
- PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE BRIEF (Apr 15, 2024)
- SCHEDULING ORDER (Mar 8, 2024)
- SCHEDULING ORDER (Feb 27, 2024)
- DEFENDANT'S ADDENDUM (Feb 22, 2024)
- DEFENDANT'S OPENING BRIEF (Feb 22, 2024)
- DEFENDANT'S STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE (Jan 17, 2024)
- SCHEDULING ORDER (Jan 3, 2024)
- DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF APPEAL (Jan 2, 2024)