Yesterday, the Supreme Court denied PhRMA’s request for review of the Eighth Circuit’s decision upholding Arkansas Act 1103, which requires delivery of 340B drugs to an unlimited number of contract pharmacies. The Supreme Court’s decision to deny review is an important victory for 340B safety net providers, which have long argued that states can regulate drug distribution.

This decision is the latest of several court victories in legal challenges to state drug distribution laws. But the battle is ongoing. Challenges to state laws similar to Act 1103 are pending in the Fourth and Fifth Circuits and in district courts in several states. AstraZeneca and Sanofi also brought actions challenging Act 1103 in Arkansas, raising arguments that are allegedly different than the ones raised by PhRMA. While the Supreme Court denies certiorari much more often than it accepts review of a case, the Court is more likely to accept certiorari when two or more Circuit Courts have reached different decisions on the same issue. This is not the case here, but it is possible that the Supreme Court could later review a subsequent Circuit court decision if a circuit split develops.

The Powers 340B Team will continue to monitor manufacturer challenges to state laws protecting 340B contract pharmacy arrangements.