Federal judge blocks Arkansas law barring pharmacy benefit managers from owning pharmacies in state
CVS and Express Scripts had sued the state over the law. The law, Miller wrote, 'appears to overtly discriminate against plaintiffs as out of state companies, and the state has failed to show that it has no other means to advance its interests.' Republican Attorney General Tim Griffin said he respected the court's decision and planned to appeal.
Supporters of the Arkansas law have said it's needed because pharmacy benefit managers are forcing independent pharmacies, especially those in rural areas, to close. CVS and Express Scripts in their lawsuits said the restriction would have devastating effects on consumers if it was allowed to take effect. CVS, which ran TV ads urging Sanders to veto the legislation, has said it would have to close its 23 retail pharmacies in the state if the law takes effect. The company said it was pleased with the decision.
'We continue to be focused on serving people in Arkansas and are actively looking to work together with the state to reduce drug prices and ensure access to pharmacies,' CVS said in a statement. Arkansas is among several states where lawmakers have taken up efforts to regulate pharmacy benefit managers.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Arabiya
an hour ago
- Al Arabiya
Breaking: India will buy Russian oil despite Trump's threats: Report
Indian officials have said they would keep purchasing oil from Russia despite the threat of penalties that US President Donald Trump said he would impose, the New York Times reported on Saturday. Reuters could not immediately verify the report.
Al Arabiya
an hour ago
- Al Arabiya
FAA planning more helicopter route changes after January collision that killed 67
The Federal Aviation Administration said on Friday it is planning additional helicopter route changes near Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport after the January 29 mid-air collision of an American Airlines regional jet and an Army helicopter that killed 67 people. FAA official Nick Fuller said at a National Transportation Safety Board investigative hearing that an agency work group is planning changes on a key helicopter route near Reagan after imposing permanent restrictions on non-essential helicopter operations in March and further restricting where they could operate in June. NTSB officials at the hearing expressed concerns about a 'disconnect' between front-line air traffic controllers and agency leaders and raised other questions about FAA actions before the fatal collision, including why earlier reports of close call incidents did not prompt safety improvements. Board members have also raised concerns about the failure of the FAA to turn over documents in a timely fashion during the investigation of the January collision. The NTSB received details on staffing levels at the time of the January 29 crash 'after considerable confusion and a series of corrections and updates from the FAA,' a board report said. The hearing has run more than 30 hours over three days and raised a series of troubling questions, including about the failure of the primary controller on duty to issue an alert to the American regional jet and the actions of an assistant controller who was supposed to assist the primary controller. 'That did not occur and we're trying to understand why. And no one has been able to tell us what the individual was doing during that time,' NTSB Chair Jennifer Homendy said. Homendy said earlier this week the FAA had ignored warnings about serious safety issues. 'Every sign was there that there was a safety risk, and the tower was telling you,' Homendy said. 'You transferred people out instead of taking ownership over the fact that everybody in FAA in the tower was saying there was a problem... Fix it. Do better.' FAA officials at the hearing vowed to work more collaboratively and address concerns. Senator Tim Kaine on Friday also cited concerns raised by an FAA manager about the volume of flights at the airport before the collision and the decision by Congress last year to add five additional daily flights to Reagan. 'Congress must act to reduce dangerous congestion by removing flights into and out of (Reagan National),' Kaine said.
Al Arabiya
an hour ago
- Al Arabiya
Columbia University deal with Trump admin sets dangerous precedent, academics warn
Columbia University's $200 million agreement with President Donald Trump's administration marks the end of a months-long showdown, but academics warn it is just the first round of a government 'assault' on higher education. Academics from Columbia and beyond have expressed concerns that the deal -- which makes broad-ranging concessions and increases government oversight -- will become the blueprint for how Trump brings other universities to heel. The New York institution was the first to be targeted in Trump's war against elite universities, for what the US president claimed was its failure to tackle antisemitism on campus in the wake of pro-Palestinian protests. It was stripped of hundreds of millions of dollars of federal funding and lost its ability to apply for new research grants. Labs saw vital funding frozen, and dozens of researchers were laid off. But Columbia last week agreed to pay the government $200 million, and an additional $21 million to settle an investigation into antisemitism. According to Ted Mitchell, president of the American Council on Education, the lack of due process -- with the government slashing funding before carrying out a formal investigation -- left Columbia in an 'untenable position.' Columbia law professor David Pozen agreed, saying the 'manner in which the deal was constructed has been unlawful and coercive from the start' and slamming the agreement as giving 'legal form to an extortion scheme.' Federal oversight The deal goes beyond addressing antisemitism and makes concessions on international student admissions, race and ethnicity considerations in admissions and single-sex spaces on campus, among other issues. Columbia also agreed to appoint an independent monitor to implement the deal, share ethnicity admissions data with the government and crack down on campus protests. Many of the provisions 'represent significant incursions onto Columbia's autonomy,' said Pozen. 'What's happened at Columbia is part of a broader authoritarian attack on civil society,' he said, pointing to similar pressures on law firms and media organizations to fall in line. According to the law professor, the deal 'signals the emergence of a new regulatory regime in which the Trump administration will periodically and unpredictably shake down other schools and demand concessions from them.' In the coming weeks, Pozen said he expected the 'administration will put a lot of pressure on Harvard and other schools to follow suit.' Harvard University has pushed back against the government, filing a lawsuit in a bid to reverse sweeping funding cuts. But Steven Levitsky, a professor of government at Harvard, said that 'in terms of academic freedom and in terms of democracy, the (Columbia) precedent is devastating.' 'First round' Education Secretary Linda McMahon said she hoped the Columbia deal would be a 'template for other universities around the country.' On Wednesday, McMahon announced a deal with Brown University to restore some federal funding and end ongoing investigations after the Ivy League school agreed to end race considerations in admissions and adopt a biological definition of gender. Brown President Christina Paxson admitted 'there are other aspects of the agreement that were not part of previous federal reviews of Brown policies' but were 'priorities of the federal administration.' Harvard is reportedly considering forking out $500 million to settle, according to the New York Times. Others have made smaller concessions to appease the government, with Trump's alma mater the University of Pennsylvania banning transgender women from competing in women's sports, and the University of Virginia's head resigning after scrutiny over its diversity programs. Brendan Cantwell, a professor at Michigan State University who researches the history and governance of higher education, said government interference in universities 'has not happened at scale like this, probably ever in American history.' While some university staff see striking an agreement as the quickest way to reopen the federal funding spigot, Cantwell warned that concessions such as sharing ethnicity data from admissions could be 'weaponized' and provide fodder for future probes. Levitsky agreed, saying: 'Extortionists don't stop at the first concession. Extortionists come back for more.' 'There's a very high likelihood that this is just the first round,' he said. Pozen noted that it will be harder for 'major research universities to hold the line' compared to smaller colleges which are less reliant on federal funding. But Levitsky still urged Harvard to stand its ground and 'fight back,' including in the courts. 'Fighting an authoritarian regime is costly, but that's what we have to do,' he said. 'This is an unprecedented assault, and universities need to work together.'
