Pharmaceutical Research & Manufacturers of America v. Williams

U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota

Tab Group

Merits Stage

District court dismisses PhRMA’s challenge to Minnesota law requiring manufacturers to provide insulin without compensation

March 15, 2021

The court reasoned that PhRMA cannot seek equitable relief under the Takings Clause because adequate state-law compensation remedies are available. The U.S. Chamber filed a coalition amicus brief supporting PhRMA.

U.S. Chamber files coalition amicus brief in support of challenge to Minnesota law that violates the Takings Clause by requiring manufacturers to provide insulin without compensation

October 5, 2020

Click here to view the amicus brief filed by the U.S. Chamber and the National Association of Manufacturers. Jeremy C. Marwell of Vinson & Elkins LLP, along with Thomas H. Boyd and David A. Aafedt of Winthrop & Weinstine, P.A., served as co-counsel for the coalition.

Case Documents

Complaint -- PhRMA v. Williams (D. Minn.).pdf

U.S. Chamber and NAM Amicus Brief -- PhRMA v. Williams (D. Minn.).pdf

Opinion and Order -- PhRMA v. Williams (D. Minn.).pdf