Novo Nordisk et al. v. Becerra et al.

Docket No.
3:23-cv-20814
District Court
New Jersey

Goal

  • Block enforcement of a law
  • Block enforcement of an agency action
  • Declaration that a law is unlawful
  • Declaration that agency action 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, the Nondelegation Doctrine, the Administrative Procedure Act, and exceeds statutory authority. 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)

25 Major Filings

View More

Related Litigation

Current Status

Decision issued

Legal Issues

Separation of Powers, Fifth Amendment - Due Process Clause, First Amendment - Free Speech Clause, Administrative Procedure Act - Lack of Statutory Authority, Ultra Vires

Amicus Briefs for Defendant(s)

AARP et al., Public Citizen et al., American Public Health Association et al., Economists and Health Policy Scholars, Law Scholars, Healthcare and Medicare Experts, Center for American Progress et al., Abrams Institute for Freedom of Expression

Date Filed
September 29, 2023
Case Type
Civil
Court Type
District Court
Court
New Jersey
Judge
Quraishi, Zahid N. Appointed By: Joseph R. Biden Jr.
Plaintiff(s)
Novo Nordisk Inc., Novo Nordisk Pharma, Inc.
Lead Counsel For Plaintiff(s)
King & Spalding LLP
Defendant(s)
Department of Health and Human Services; Xavier Becerra; Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services; Chiquita Brooks-LaSure
Lead Counsel for Defendant(s)
Government