Dayton Area Chamber of Commerce et al. v. Becerra et al.

Docket No.
3:23-cv-00156
District Court
Ohio Southern

Goal

  • Block enforcement of a law
  • Declaration that a law is unlawful

Issues

Case History

Why this Matters:

The plaintiffs argue that the Inflation Reduction Act’s Medicare drug negotiation process violates the First Amendment, Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment, Excessive Fines Clause, and the Nondelegation Doctrine, and exceeds Congress’s enumerated powers. Medicare’s authority to negotiate the price of certain single-source, high-priced drugs is estimated to result in substantial savings for Medicare beneficiaries and the federal government. 


Potential Impact:

Successful challenges to Medicare’s negotiation authority would negate savings to Medicare beneficiaries and taxpayers, and could severely restrict federal regulatory authority in the health care arena. 

News And Analysis (7)

44 Major Filings

View More

Related Litigation

Current Status

Decision issued

Legal Issues

First Amendment - Free Speech Clause, Fifth Amendment - Due Process Clause, Nondelegation Doctrine, Eighth Amendment - Excessive Fines Clause, Separation of Powers, Tenth Amendment

Amicus Briefs for Defendant(s)

Public Citizen et al.; AARP and AARP Foundation et al.; American Public Health Association et al.; Abrams Institute for Freedom of Expression; Law Scholars

Date Filed
June 9, 2023
Case Type
Civil
Court Type
District Court
Court
Ohio Southern
Court Division
Western
Judge
Newman, Michael J. Appointed By: Donald Trump
Plaintiff(s)
Dayton Area Chamber of Commerce; Ohio Chamber of Commerce; Michigan Chamber of Commerce; Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America
Lead Counsel For Plaintiff(s)
King and Spalding LLP
Defendant(s)
Xavier Becerra, Department of Health & Human Services; Chiquita Brooks-LaSure, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
Lead Counsel for Defendant(s)
Government