Expressing disapproval of the decision by the Supreme Court in Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc.
Latest action (8 Jul 2011): Introduced
What this bill does
H.Res. 343 is a House resolution expressing the House of Representatives' disapproval of the Supreme Court's 2011 decision in Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc. That case struck down a Vermont law restricting the sale of doctors' prescribing records for pharmaceutical marketing purposes without physician consent, with the Court applying heightened First Amendment scrutiny to the regulation. The resolution states the House's view that the Court wrongly applied this heightened standard to what it considers a commercial regulation, and that concerns about patient privacy, doctor confidentiality, public health, and rising health care costs outweigh any burden the Vermont law placed on pharmaceutical companies' marketing strategies. It also asserts that states should have authority to regulate the pharmaceutical industry as they see fit for residents' health and safety.
As a resolution, this measure does not create new law or reverse the Court's ruling; it is a formal statement of opinion by the House. It would primarily affect public discourse and signal congressional sentiment rather than impose direct obligations on pharmaceutical companies, data-mining firms, physicians, or states. It does not alter Vermont's law or restore the invalidated restrictions.
The resolution was introduced by Representative Edward Markey on July 8, 2011, and referred to the House Committees on Energy and Commerce and the Judiciary. It did not receive a vote and saw no further action before the 112th Congress ended, meaning it did not advance beyond introduction.
Plain-English summary generated by Bill100 AI from the official record. Always verify against the source below.
Official summary
Disapproves of the majority opinion in Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc., because it puts prescribers at risk of having their prescriber-identifying information sold without their knowledge or consent.
Expresses the belief of the House of Representatives that: (1) the Supreme Court incorrectly applied a heightened First Amendment standard of review to an instance of commercial regulation; (2) the negative impact on a pharmaceutical manufacturer's ability to market its products is outweighed by the interests of patient safety, doctor privacy, and health care costs; and (3) the states have the right to regulate the pharmaceutical industry based on what is best for the health and safety of their residents.
Common questions
- What does H.Res. 343 do?
- H.Res. 343 is a House resolution expressing the House of Representatives' disapproval of the Supreme Court's 2011 decision in Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc. That case struck down a Vermont law restricting the sale of doctors' prescribing records for pharmaceutical marketing purposes without physician consent, with the Court applying heightened First Amendment scrutiny to the regulation. The resolution states the House's view that the Court wrongly applied this heightened standard to what it considers a commercial regulation, and that concerns about patient privacy, doctor confidentiality, public health, and rising health care costs outweigh any burden the Vermont law placed on pharmaceutical companies' marketing strategies. It also asserts that states should have authority to regulate the pharmaceutical industry as they see fit for residents' health and safety. As a resolution, this measure does not create new law or reverse the Court's ruling; it is a formal statement of opinion by the House. It would primarily affect public discourse and signal congressional sentiment rather than impose direct obligations on pharmaceutical companies, data-mining firms, physicians, or states. It does not alter Vermont's law or restore the invalidated restrictions. The resolution was introduced by Representative Edward Markey on July 8, 2011, and referred to the House Committees on Energy and Commerce and the Judiciary. It did not receive a vote and saw no further action before the 112th Congress ended, meaning it did not advance beyond introduction.
- Has H.Res. 343 become law?
- Not yet. As of 8 Jul 2011, H.Res. 343 is introduced.
- Who sponsored H.Res. 343?
- H.Res. 343 was sponsored by Sen. Edward “Ed” Markey [D-MA] (Democrat-MA), with 0 cosponsors.
- What's the latest action on H.Res. 343?
- Introduced (8 Jul 2011).
Related bills in Health
Expressing support for the designation of September 22, 2026, as “National Hispanic Nurses Day” and recognizing the National Association of Hispanic Nurses as the leading organization representing and advocating for Hispanic nurses.
Recognizing the importance of protecting continuous Medicaid coverage for individuals undergoing active cancer treatment.
Expressing support for the designation of the third week of September as “Fungal Disease Awareness Week” and encouraging efforts to improve awareness, diagnosis, treatment, surveillance, and prevention of fungal diseases in the United States.
A resolution supporting the designation of October 2026 as “Substance Use & Misuse Prevention Month” to raise awareness of substance use and misuse in the United States.
Bill100 mirrors the public U.S. legislative record from Congress.gov and GovTrack and adds plain-English AI summaries. It is an information tool, not legal, compliance or lobbying advice, and it is not affiliated with the U.S. Congress or any government agency. AI summaries can simplify or omit detail — every bill links to the official source; verify there before you rely on it.