Suppr超能文献

《医保药品价格谈判的合宪性:以征收条款为视角》。

The Constitutionality of Medicare Drug-Price Negotiation under the Takings Clause.

机构信息

YALE UNIVERSITY, NEW HAVEN, CT, USA.

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY, Berkeley, CA, USA.

出版信息

J Law Med Ethics. 2023;51(4):961-971. doi: 10.1017/jme.2024.10. Epub 2024 Mar 13.

Abstract

In recent months, pharmaceutical manufacturers have brought legal challenges to a provision of the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) empowering the federal government to negotiate the prices Medicare pays for certain prescription medications. One key argument made in these filings is that price negotiation is a "taking" of property and violates the Takings Clause of the US Constitution. Through original case law and health policy analysis, we show that government price negotiation and even price regulation of goods and services, including patented goods, are constitutional under the Takings Clause. Finding that the IRA violates the Takings Clause would radically upend settled constitutional law and jeopardize the US's most important state and federal health care programs.

摘要

近几个月来,制药商对 2022 年《通胀削减法案》(IRA)中的一项规定提起法律挑战,该规定授权联邦政府就医疗保险支付某些处方药的价格进行谈判。这些文件中的一个主要论点是,价格谈判是对财产的“征收”,违反了美国宪法的征收条款。通过原始判例法和卫生政策分析,我们表明,根据征收条款,政府对商品和服务(包括专利商品)的价格谈判甚至价格管制都是合宪的。如果认定 IRA 违反了征收条款,将彻底颠覆既定的宪法法律,并危及美国最重要的州和联邦医疗保健计划。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验