Latest news with #MedicareAct
The Hill
5 days ago
- Business
- The Hill
Two more cases challenging Medicare negotiation rejected in federal courts
Federal judges in Texas and Connecticut on Thursday ruled against arguments challenging the constitutionality of the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program, delivering two more blows to the pharmaceutical industry this week after an appeals court upheld the dismissal of a similar case. In Connecticut, the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a decision granted by U.S. District Judge Michael P. Shea last year against pharmaceutical company Boehringer Ingelheim. The company's diabetes medication Jardiance was among the first 10 drugs chosen for Medicare negotiations and two more of its products were chosen for the following round of negotiations. In his 2024 ruling, Shea found that Boehringer Ingelheim could not demonstrate irreparable harm as a result of Medicare negotiations and also agreed with the federal government that the program did not violate laws such as the Medicare Act or the Administrative Procedures Act. Boehringer Ingelheim had also argued Medicare negotiations violated its First and Fifth Amendment rights. In its ruling on Thursday, the Second District Court of Appeals concurred with Shea's ruling, finding that the company's claims of unconstitutionality were not proven in their argument. 'Participation in the Negotiation Program is voluntary and thus does not entail an unlawful deprivation of rights,' the judgment stated. 'The program does not impose unconstitutional conditions on Boehringer's ability to participate in Medicare and Medicaid because the program is designed to promote the legitimate government purpose of controlling Medicare spending and does not regulate the company's conduct in the private market.' The Hill has reached out to Boehringer Ingelheim for comment. In Texas, Senior U.S. District Judge David Alan Ezra dismissed the lawsuit brought forward by the trade group PhRMA with prejudice, closing the case. As in Connecticut and other cases challenging Medicare negotiations, Ezra noted that drugmaker participation in Medicare is entirely voluntary. Ezra stated that because of the voluntary participation, drugmakers do not have a protected interest to sell drugs to Medicare at their preferred 'fair market value.' He similarly found that the plaintiffs had failed to demonstrate that they will suffer irreparable harm due to negotiating drug prices and was unconvinced of claims that the program violated the plaintiffs' Fifth and Eighth Amendment rights. 'In sum, Plaintiffs cannot demonstrate that the Program deprives them of a protected interest and therefore their Due Process Clause claim fails as a matter of law,' wrote Ezra, granting the federal government's request for summary judgment. The Hill has requested comment from PhRMA. These decisions come just one day after a federal judge upheld a ruling to dismiss a similar challenge to Medicare negotiations brought forward by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. The courts found that several of the plaintiffs attached to the case lacked standing to sue. Merith Basey, executive director of the advocacy group Patients For Affordable Drugs, lauded the rulings in a statement Thursday. 'Once again, a drug company brought its high-priced lawyers to lay out its arguments against Medicare negotiation, and once again they have lost. This ruling against Boehringer Ingelheim marks the fifth consecutive legal victory for patients who have long awaited relief from Big Pharma's monopoly control over drug prices,' said Basey. 'It's truly US v Big Pharma. Patients For Affordable Drugs stands firm in our commitment to defending the hard-won Medicare negotiation program against Big Pharma's relentless attempts to undermine it at the expense of patients,' she added.
Yahoo
27-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Winston & Strawn Welcomes Michael Kimberly as Co-Chair of the Appellate & Critical Motions Practice
WASHINGTON, May 27, 2025--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Winston & Strawn LLP announced today that Michael Kimberly has joined the firm's Washington, D.C. office as co-chair of the Appellate & Critical Motions Practice. Michael brings a remarkable record of success, having argued nine cases before the U.S. Supreme Court and delivered more than 40 appellate arguments in courts across the country, with an overall win record of two for three. In addition to his appellate work, he frequently litigates challenges to federal administrative actions under the Administrative Procedure Act and to state laws and regulations under various provisions of the U.S. Constitution. "I'm thrilled to join Winston's Washington D.C. office and to contribute to the value of its appellate and critical motions practice and litigation capabilities overall," said Michael. "Winston handles an impressive variety of high-stakes litigation cases across a range of legal areas, and I look forward to partnering with its trial teams as well as leveraging my network of clients." "We are very excited to welcome Michael as a leader in our appellate practice," said Litigation Department Co-Chairs Linda Coberly and Tom Melsheimer. "Our clients recognize the value of exceptional appellate advocates. As an accomplished Supreme Court and appellate litigator, Michael will enhance our capabilities in high-profile, mission-critical litigation for our clients across the country. And his skill set is a perfect fit for our D.C. office in particular, given his extensive experience in government-facing and constitutional litigation." Including his work in the district courts, Michael has briefed and argued more than 200 cases covering a wide range of subject matters, including environmental law, the Commerce Clause and related constitutional provisions, various sources of federal preemption, the Medicare Act and related regulations, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, the First Amendment, copyright, and the Bankruptcy Code. "As demand continues to grow for appellate lawyers who can shape litigation strategy from the outset, Michael's experience aligns with our vision for the D.C. office," said David Rogers, Washington D.C. office managing partner. "His track record of success and his experience in areas central to our clients in this region, including federal regulatory challenges, taxation, ERISA, and healthcare, will be instrumental in strengthening our presence." Winston & Strawn LLP is an international law firm with 14 offices in North America, South America, and Europe. More information about the firm is available at View source version on Contacts Michael Goodwinmgoodwin@ 646-502-3595 Sneha Satishssatish@ 646-502-3556 Sign in to access your portfolio
Business Wire
27-05-2025
- Business
- Business Wire
Winston & Strawn Welcomes Michael Kimberly as Co-Chair of the Appellate & Critical Motions Practice
WASHINGTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Winston & Strawn LLP announced today that Michael Kimberly has joined the firm's Washington, D.C. office as co-chair of the Appellate & Critical Motions Practice. Michael brings a remarkable record of success, having argued nine cases before the U.S. Supreme Court and delivered more than 40 appellate arguments in courts across the country, with an overall win record of two for three. In addition to his appellate work, he frequently litigates challenges to federal administrative actions under the Administrative Procedure Act and to state laws and regulations under various provisions of the U.S. Constitution. 'I'm thrilled to join Winston's Washington D.C. office and to contribute to the value of its appellate and critical motions practice and litigation capabilities overall,' said Michael. 'Winston handles an impressive variety of high-stakes litigation cases across a range of legal areas, and I look forward to partnering with its trial teams as well as leveraging my network of clients.' 'We are very excited to welcome Michael as a leader in our appellate practice,' said Litigation Department Co-Chairs Linda Coberly and Tom Melsheimer. 'Our clients recognize the value of exceptional appellate advocates. As an accomplished Supreme Court and appellate litigator, Michael will enhance our capabilities in high-profile, mission-critical litigation for our clients across the country. And his skill set is a perfect fit for our D.C. office in particular, given his extensive experience in government-facing and constitutional litigation.' Including his work in the district courts, Michael has briefed and argued more than 200 cases covering a wide range of subject matters, including environmental law, the Commerce Clause and related constitutional provisions, various sources of federal preemption, the Medicare Act and related regulations, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, the First Amendment, copyright, and the Bankruptcy Code. 'As demand continues to grow for appellate lawyers who can shape litigation strategy from the outset, Michael's experience aligns with our vision for the D.C. office,' said David Rogers, Washington D.C. office managing partner. 'His track record of success and his experience in areas central to our clients in this region, including federal regulatory challenges, taxation, ERISA, and healthcare, will be instrumental in strengthening our presence.' Winston & Strawn LLP is an international law firm with 14 offices in North America, South America, and Europe. More information about the firm is available at
