Commentary Addressing Risks and Opportunities Through the Lifecycle of Data, Technology, Advertising and Innovation

Data Counsel

Home | Data Counsel

The U.S. Supreme Court released its decision today in <a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/10-779.pdf">Sorrell v. IMS Health Care, Inc</a>., a case concerning the constitutionality of a Vermont statute that prohibited pharmacies from selling or disclosing prescriber-identifying information taken from prescriptions for marketing purposes.&nbsp; The challenge to the statute was made by data mining companies.&nbsp; The Supreme Court stated that "speech in aid of pharmaceutical marketing ... is a form of expression protected by the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment."&nbsp; After applying heightened scrutiny, the Court found that the Vermont statute unjustly burdened speech in violation of the First Amendment.
Thirty-five states filed an amicus brief supporting the law as necessary to protect the privacy of patient data.&nbsp; Senator Leahy (VT) issued a <a href="http://leahy.senate.gov/press/press_releases/release/?id=4A16CE1B-1710-44B7-9B6D-AC723AD6BDCE">press release</a> following the decision, which stated:
<blockquote>
Today the Supreme Court has overturned a sensible Vermont law that sought to protect the privacy of the doctor-patient relationship.&nbsp; This divided ruling is a win for data miners and large corporations and a loss for those of us who care about privacy not only in my home state of Vermont but across the nation.&nbsp; States like Vermont must be able to protect the privacy of sensitive information exchanged between a doctor and patient.&nbsp; This decision undermines that ability, and risks unduly influencing doctors in their future prescription choices.
</blockquote>

Supreme Court Finds Vermont Data Mining Law Unconstitutional