October Term 2002 · Docket 01-188

Do uninsured patients pay higher drug prices?

Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America argues that cash-paying patients face higher costs. Kevin Concannon disputes this claim.

Official caption
Pharmaceutical Research and Mfrs. of America v. Concannon
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Mr. Hagler stated that uninsured people pay more for drugs.

    He noted that cash-paying patients are least able to absorb high prices.

    Mr. Phillips addressed the Court regarding the legal basis of the case.

    Chief Justice Rehnquist questioned whether adverse consequences are factually unresolved.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

The dispute centers on prescription drug pricing for uninsured individuals. One side claims these patients pay more than other buyers. The other side challenges this assertion.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on January 22, 2003.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America wants the Court to recognize that uninsured patients pay higher prices.

Kevin Concannon wants the Court to reject the claim that uninsured patients pay more.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

Mr. Hagler argues that uninsured patients are charged more than any other purchaser.

Mr. Phillips argues that the legal framework supports the side that brought the case's position.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Chief Justice Rehnquist asked if adverse consequences are an unresolved factual question.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

Uninsured patients face financial strain when paying cash for prescriptions. High prices impact those least able to absorb costs. The outcome affects access to affordable medication for vulnerable groups.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON