Skip to content

Supreme Court Immunizes Generic Drug Manufacturers

I am writing this opinion piece, regarding the latest US Supreme Court Generic Drug Decision, which in my humble opinion is disastrous to Patient Safety. The case is PLIVA, Inc. v. Mensing. On…

I am writing this opinion piece, regarding the latest US Supreme  Court Generic Drug Decision, which in my humble opinion is  disastrous  to Patient Safety. The case is PLIVA, Inc. v. Mensing.

dangerous_drug_attorney.jpg

On June 23, 2011, the United States Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4  decision that Generic Drug Manufacturers cannot be sued for failing to  warn consumers of the possible side effects of their defective products,  as long as they use the same warnings on the brand-name drugs. This  decision is absurd on its face; this means that brand-name drug  manufacturers can be held responsible for their failure to warn  consumers about the dangers, but generic manufacturers are now provided  an all encompassing shield that brand-name manufacturers do not have.

The seriousness and ramifications of this opinion cannot be  understated.  The Court’s decision  now prevents millions of Americans,  who have been seriously injured by generic drugs, from seeking  compensation for their injuries. Generic drug manufacturers have a huge  business in the United States.  This opinion immunizes those drug  manufacturers from liability. Another win for Big Pharma, and the  consumer gets it again.

The dissent, ridiculed the Court’s decision, stating, “As a result of  today’s decision, whether a consumer harmed by inadequate warnings can  obtain relief turns solely on the happenstance of whether her pharmacist  filled her prescription with a brand-name or generic drug. The Court  gets one thing right: this outcome makes little sense.” “In some States,  pharmacists must dispense generic drugs absent instruction to the  contrary from a consumer’s physician. Even when consumers can request  brand-name drugs, the price of the brand-name drug or the consumers’  insurance plans may make it impossible to do so. As a result, in many  cases, consumers will have no ability to preserve their state-law right  to recover for injuries caused by inadequate warnings.”

In many cases, once generic versions of a drug enter the market, the  brand name manufacturers stop selling the drug.  A consumer may have no  option but to use a generic drug, and then find themselves without a  remedy if they develop a catastrophic injury.

This decision also means that brand-name manufacturers will be held  to a different yet safer standard.  The Supreme Court decided in Wyeth  v. Levine, brand-name manufacturers are responsible for their warning  labels and required to update them at all times.

Patients will now be taking generic drugs at their own risk. It is  absurd that doctors and patients will have to make medical decisions  knowing that only brand-name drug manufacturers – not generics – can be  held accountable for their drugs’ dangerous side-effects.

Today, 70 percent of all prescription drugs are filled with generic  versions, accounting for about 2.6 billion prescriptions every year.   Additionally, the generic drug industry continues to expand – nine of  the industry’s 10 biggest blockbuster drugs are going off-patent within  in the next few years.

The ruling is an immense blow for consumer rights, equality and  fairness, principals upon which the American legal system was founded.

Shezad Malik MD JD

Shezad Malik MD JD

Shezad Malik is an Internal Medicine and Cardiology specialist, a Texas Medical Doctor (retired) and Defective Medical Device and Dangerous Drug Attorney.

All articles

More in FDA & Prescription Drugs

See all

Januvia Pancreatic Cancer Lawsuit

/

More from Shezad Malik MD JD

See all
Ozempic and Wegovy, Here’s the Skinny

Ozempic and Wegovy, Here’s the Skinny

/
Benzene Work Exposure leads to Blood Cancer

Benzene Work Exposure leads to Blood Cancer

/