# Supreme Court **URL:** \ **Category:** Share\ **Created:** [December 8, 2025, 4:32pm UTC](https://forum.fudiabetes.org/t/supreme-court/15654 "2025-12-08T16:32:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 3\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![mohe0001](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex030/user_avatar/forum.fudiabetes.org/mohe0001/32/11783_2.png) [@mohe0001](https://forum.fudiabetes.org/u/mohe0001)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2025, 4:32pm UTC](https://forum.fudiabetes.org/t/supreme-court/15654/1 "2025-12-08T16:32:29Z")
The Supreme Court is currently trying to settle the whole business holding up an FTC ruling about insulin price gouging and PBM market fixing. FTC case: [FTC Sues Prescription Drug Middlemen for Artificially Inflating Insulin Drug Prices | Federal Trade Commission](https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2024/09/ftc-sues-prescription-drug-middlemen-artificially-inflating-insulin-drug-prices) Supreme Court hearing began today: [Supreme Ct. Hears Case on Executive Authority Amid Trump Firing FTC Official | Video | C-SPAN.org](https://www.c-span.org/event/public-affairs-event/supreme-ct-hears-case-on-executive-authority-amid-trump-firing-ftc-official/438407) Once this matter is settled, we should have a rapid ruling out of FTC. The Supreme Court is fast compared to other courts, so it won’t be long now. We don’t currently have judges for the FTC case. The Supreme Court needs to rule in order for us to have judges. The FTC will need to establish a quorum. That means they need judges from both parties to hear the case. That will all move very fast once the court weighs in. Traditionally, regulatory agencies (like FTC) have been considered nonpartisan agencies who provide rulings on stuff that is too complicated for Congress (like if individual freedoms & market freedom is being preserved in the medical markets). Part of what you hear them discuss are things like if the Federal Reserve has independence or not. All the diabetics and pharmacists business at the FTC got held up because no one really expected this to happen. You just can never totally predict what is going to happen. The dance continues…. [![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/t-Q3ADnJKpY/maxresdefault.jpg "Pulp Fiction "You Never Can Tell" [HD]") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-Q3ADnJKpY) ---
**Author:** ![jbowler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e274bd/32.png) [@jbowler](https://forum.fudiabetes.org/u/jbowler)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2025, 12:42am UTC](https://forum.fudiabetes.org/t/supreme-court/15654/2 "2025-12-09T00:42:30Z")
Here’s the BBC take on the case: > **[US Supreme Court appears poised to expand Trump's power to fire federal official](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3e073pglvzo)** > > Trump v Slaughter, heard by the top court on Monday, is a case that could have major implications for the independence of some federal agencies. The main point here is that the court agreed to hear it at all; they could have just slam-dunked it by not hearing it. The beeb concludes that the court is set up to allow the firing and, thereby, trump any legal congressional limitation on presidential authority with regard to federal bodies which are not explicitly controlled by congress or the judiciary. So, yes, the supreme court case will affect control over the FTC because arbitrary firing of FTC members is obviously an effective way of controlling FTC determinations. However the effect on any specific case is much more a matter of who paid who and how much. The FTC is judicial (“quasi-judicial”) in exactly the same way as the supreme court is; both interpret the law and the law is subject to interpretation. Aargh. If only laws had to be written as computer programs, then they would be unambiguous. Although they wouldn’t work any more than any computer program does. ---
**Author:** ![mohe0001](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex030/user_avatar/forum.fudiabetes.org/mohe0001/32/11783_2.png) [@mohe0001](https://forum.fudiabetes.org/u/mohe0001)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2025, 4:43am UTC](https://forum.fudiabetes.org/t/supreme-court/15654/3 "2025-12-09T04:43:21Z")
There is widespread bipartisan agreement that the matter needs to be handled. There is support from both Vance and Trump, who have been pretty vocal about their support for PBM reform. Congress understands, to the degree that is possible. FTC has written at length about it. Everyone has been briefed because this has gone on for ages beyond what it should have. I’m not worried about an outcome at FTC. The outcome is fairly predetermined no matter who the judges are. The Supreme Court case really has nothing to do with if people want PBM reform or not. It’s a separate issue. Just hang in there a little longer. It won’t be long now. Where’s your picture, @jbowler?