Medicare Drug Pricing Negotiations: Assessing Constitutional Structural Limits

A series of structural constitutional arguments lodged in multiple cases against Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' (CMS) authorities to negotiate prescription drug prices via the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act threaten the legitimacy of CMS program and federal agency powers.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inThe Journal of law, medicine & ethics Vol. 51; no. 4; pp. 956 - 960
Main Authors White, Erica N, Saxon, Mary, Hodge, Jr, James G, Michaels, Joel
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published England Cambridge University Press 01.01.2023
Subjects
Aged
Beneficiaries
Case reports
Columns: Public Health and the Law
Drug Costs
Drug prices
Excise taxes
Expenditures
Government agencies
Humans
Inflation
Legitimacy
Litigation
Medicaid
Medical ethics
Medicare
Negotiating
Negotiations
Pharmaceutical industry
Pharmacists
Prescription Drugs
Price regulations
Public health
United States
Wage & price controls
United States
United States > US
CMS
Public Health
Medicare
Prescription Drugs
Agency Deference
Constitution
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:A series of structural constitutional arguments lodged in multiple cases against Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' (CMS) authorities to negotiate prescription drug prices via the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act threaten the legitimacy of CMS program and federal agency powers.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
About This Column
James G. Hodge, Jr., J.D., LL.M., serves as the section editor for Public Health and the Law. He is the Peter Kiewit Foundation Professor of Law and Director, Center for Public Health Law and Policy, Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law, Arizona State University (ASU).
ISSN:1073-1105
1748-720X
DOI:10.1017/jme.2024.12