TY - JOUR
T1 - FDA preemption of drug and device labeling
T2 - who should decide what goes on a drug label?
AU - Valoir, Tamsen
AU - Ghosh, Shubha
PY - 2011
Y1 - 2011
N2 - The Supreme Court decided an issue that is critical to consumer health and safety last year. In April 2009, the Supreme Court held that extensive FDA regulation of drugs did not preempt a state law claim that an additional warning on the label was necessary to make the drug reasonably safe for use. Thus, states--and even courts and juries--are now free to cast their vote on what a drug label should say. This is in direct contrast to medical devices, where the federal statute regulating medical devices expressly provides that state regulations are preempted. This Article discusses basic preemption principles and drugs, and explores the policy ramifications of pro- and anti-preemption policy in the healthcare industry.
AB - The Supreme Court decided an issue that is critical to consumer health and safety last year. In April 2009, the Supreme Court held that extensive FDA regulation of drugs did not preempt a state law claim that an additional warning on the label was necessary to make the drug reasonably safe for use. Thus, states--and even courts and juries--are now free to cast their vote on what a drug label should say. This is in direct contrast to medical devices, where the federal statute regulating medical devices expressly provides that state regulations are preempted. This Article discusses basic preemption principles and drugs, and explores the policy ramifications of pro- and anti-preemption policy in the healthcare industry.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84855178227&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84855178227&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Article
C2 - 22145525
AN - SCOPUS:84855178227
SN - 0748-383X
VL - 21
SP - 555
EP - 598
JO - Health matrix (Cleveland, Ohio : 1991)
JF - Health matrix (Cleveland, Ohio : 1991)
IS - 2
ER -