SACRAMENTO, Calif., Jan. 16, 2026 — California-based free market think tank the Pacific Research Institute today announced it has submitted an amicus curiae brief asking the U.S. Supreme Court to take up two cases challenging the federal government’s new prescription drug pricing program created under the Inflation Reduction Act.

The cases, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services and Bristol Myers Squibb Co. v. Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services, center on the federal government’s authority to impose government-set prices on prescription drugs bought through Medicare and Medicaid.

The dispute revolves around an Inflation Reduction Act provision that lets the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services require drug manufacturers to sell certain medicines at significantly lower prices. Those who decline face punitive taxes or being barred from Medicare and Medicaid—programs that together make up nearly half of all U.S. prescription drug spending.

PRI’s brief—written by renowned constitutional scholar and attorney Richard Epstein, alongside Ben Flowers of the law firm Ashbrook Byrne Kresge Flowers LLC—contends the federal drug pricing program breaches fundamental constitutional safeguards by forcing drug manufacturers to hand over their products at rates well under fair market value.

Instead of engaging in true negotiations, the brief states, the government leverages its position as the nation’s biggest prescription drug buyer to impose non-negotiable price caps that manufacturers can’t practically turn down.

PRI’s brief notes companies would only get the illusion of choice, as rejecting the program leads to devastating penalties that render participation mandatory. The result, the brief argues, is not negotiation but coerced seizure.

The brief also warns that letting the program remain in place would erode long-established constitutional constraints on government authority and establish a precedent letting federal agencies bypass the Takings Clause merely by calling forced transfers “voluntary.”

In addition to its constitutional issues, PRI’s brief warns the program puts future medical progress at risk by diminishing the financial motivation that fuels the creation of new, life-saving treatments. Drug development is a costly, high-risk endeavor, and government-imposed price controls hamper companies’ ability to recoup those investments.

If the program moves forward, the brief concludes, it would send a discouraging message to innovators across the pharmaceutical industry and eventually restrict patients’ access to future breakthroughs.

The Pacific Research Institute () advocates for freedom, opportunity, and personal responsibility through free-market policy solutions. Follow PRI on , , and .

Media Contact
Matt Fleming
(916) 389-9774

SOURCE Pacific Research Institute