FDA preemption
 | This article needs additional citations for verification. (August 2008) |
 | This article's lead section may be too short to adequately summarize the key points. (September 2009) |
FDA Preemption is the legal theory in the United States that exempts product manufacturers from tort claims regarding Food and Drug Administration approved products. FDA Preemption has been a highly contentious issue. In general, consumer groups are against it while the FDA and pharmaceutical manufacturers are in favor of it, arguing that the FDA should set both the floor and the ceiling for drug regulation. Michigan is the only state that voluntarily applies FDA Preemption to its own state tort law through a regulatory compliance defense, although Michigan's law has been controversial and efforts to repeal it are underway.[1]
Relevant cases
- Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc. (2008) The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that manufacturers of FDA-approved devices are protected from liability under state laws.
- Wyeth v. Levine (2009) The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Vermont tort law was not preempted in this case.
References
- ^ When and How to Defer to the FDA: Learning from Michigan's Regulatory Compliance Defense Michigan Telecommunications and Technology Law Review, Vol. 15, p. 565, 2009.
External links
- Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America's official statement in support of FDA preemption.
- A statement against FDA preemption
  | This article relating to law in the United States or its constituent jurisdictions is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |