They say that we might not have an FTC ruling until summer.
It’s not exactly helping The Dragons of healthcare when the establishment drags their feet because the states are gonna start suing for monetary damages. They are already filing en masse.
Only two states (MN & CA) had previously filed lawsuits over this and only one has settled - AG Ellison in MN (Swanson filed it before leaving office).
The FTC case was filed in administrative court - to enable a fast ruling, with no potential for monetary damages. Now states pickup their pitchforks. If we have to wait this long for an FTC ruling, then maybe we should be paid monetary damages for our trouble. MN already sued and settled with the insulin manufacturers, but not the PBMs.
Here’s the list:
AI forgot CA. CA also filed against the drug manufacturers and PBMs. Oregon wants 900 million dollars. That’s a big lawsuit. https://www.doj.state.or.us/media-home/news-media-releases/ag-rayfield-files-lawsuit-seeking-900-million-over-skyrocketing-insulin-prices/ But these suits can take 5 years to conclude. California filed early and they are 3 years into it. Indiana also filed.
QUESTION:
Can you explain anything about ‘order of operations’ here? Like, if we expect an FTC ruling over the summer, how does that impact state lawsuits? In particular, if an FTC ruling results in no monetary damages, can the states still sue for monetary damages? Those state cases take 5 years to settle. So, we will get an FTC ruling first. How does FTC’s ruling cascade down through the chain of litigation? It’s not exactly the same a ruling in a traditional court. But I imagine it provides support for state actions? Maybe FTC doesn’t produce monetary damages directly, but has the power to influence that indirectly.