On Monday, June 29, 2009, the United States Supreme Court denied granting writ of certiorari in the case of IMS Health vs. Ayotte, the U.S. Court of Appeals First Circuit ruling that upheld a New Hampshire law restricting the commercial use of prescriber-identifiable data.
That decision reversed a lower court’s decision that had previously ruled such restrictions were in violation of the First Amendment’s protection of commercial speech. The appellate court, instead, ruled that the First Amendment afforded no such protection to the gathering, analysis or publication of data for commercial purposes, and that restriction of such data was not an abridgment of free speech. With the U.S. Supreme Court declining to review, that decision stands and the New Hampshire law remains in effect.
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
- The Battle of New Hampshire
- New Hampshire Union Leader - “New Hampshire Gets an Overdose of Unintended Consequences” – By Fred Cate, Professor, Indiana University School of Law-Bloomington
- Pharmaceutical Executive Direct - “Prescribing Data: It’s a Matter of Free Speech” - By Beth Herskovits, Pharmaceutical Executive Direct
- Pharmaceutical Executive - “From the Editor: Undecided.” By Patrick Clinton, Editor, Pharmaceutical Executive
- New Hampshire Business Review - “The Wrong Prescription for N.H.” – By John Kamp, Executive Director, Coalition for Healthcare Communications, New York, New York
- Pharmaceutical Executive - “Freedom of Information: IMS and Verispan sue New Hampshire to buy prescriber data—and to protect the data sellers’ free-speech rights.” – By Beth Herskovits, Pharmaceutical Executive
- FDA Advertising & Promotion Manual - “Companies Challenge New Hampshire Data Law"
