Subscribe Subscribe   Find us on Twitter Follow POL on Twitter  



Preemption: Meanwhile, back at the convention

Apropos preemption, we note this session on Sunday, July 13, at the American Association for Justice's annual convention in Philadelphia:

Preemption Law Litigation Group

  • Theme: Federal Preemption: Fighting in Court and in Congress

  • Preemption Update: Activity on the Hill

  • Overview of Federal Preemption: Its Origins to Today's Most Popular Defense Against Liability

  • Federalism: Agencies and Legislation Encroaching on States' Rights

  • In the Trenches: Litigating Preemption in Pharmaceutical Cases

  • FDA Discovery

  • Arguing Against Preemption: Auto Defect and Other Cases

  • The Role of Amicus Briefs in Fighting Preeemption

Elsewhere, reinforcing the line of attack, a "Perspective" piece appears in the July 3 online issue of the New England Journal of Medicine, written by the journal's doctor/editors, "Why Doctors Should Worry about Preemption." The three anticipate the Supreme Court's ruling in Wyeth v. Levine and argue, "Why should doctors be concerned about preemption? In stripping patients of their right to seek redress through due process of law, preemption of common-law tort actions is not only unjust but will also result in the reduced safety of drugs and medical devices for the American people. Preemption will undermine the confidence that doctors and patients have in the safety of drugs and devices. If injured patients are unable to seek legal redress from manufacturers of defective products, they may instead turn elsewhere."

"Unable to seek legal redress..." Well, the doctors certainly know their anatomy of a straw man.

Related Entries:



Rafael Mangual
Project Manager,
Legal Policy

Manhattan Institute


Published by the Manhattan Institute

The Manhattan Insitute's Center for Legal Policy.