|
|
||
|
|
||
|
Prescription Restraint Law Declared Unconstitutional in New Hampshire
The State of New Hampshire appealed the U.S. District Court ruling that found the state's “Prescription Restraint Law” unconstitutional. The State of New Hampshire filed the motion in the First Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston, Massachusetts on August 14, 2007. Oral arguments in the appeal were held in January, and a decision is expected by mid-year.
Previously, a Federal Judge in the US District Court in Concord, New Hampshire ruled on April 30, 2007 that the state’s Prescription Restraint Law is unconstitutional, since it restricts commercial speech that is protected under the First Amendment. The ruling by Judge Paul Barbadoro overturned a state law that imposed criminal penalties on the commercial use of provider-identifiable prescription information.
New Hampshire became the first state in the country to pass a law which restricted the access to, and use of, provider-identified prescription data. Maine and Vermont followed suit. None of the three laws are in effect. While New Hampshire’s was struck down in federal court, the other two haven’t faired much better. A federal court in December, granted a preliminary injunction blocking enactment of the Maine data restriction law, and on March 5, 2008, Vermont enacted a “temporary repeal” of its law – deferring the effective date until July 1, 2009. Vermont’s law is still scheduled to be heard in federal court on July 28, 2009.
Arrayed below are links to legal documents, press releases, position papers and news articles which provide more background information on New Hampshire’s Prescription Restraint Law and the court case, IMS Health and Verispan vs. Kelly Ayotte:
HB 1346 Blocks Access to Critical Healthcare Information
Prescription Information Benefits Public Health
Physicians Control Prescribing Decisions
Amicus Briefs in Support of Plaintiffs (IMS and Verispan)
Media Coverage
