Whether the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program violates the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause and First Amendment by compelling manufacturers to sell medicines at below-market prices and agree with the government's pricing narrative

As part of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, Congress created the “Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program.” Under the Program, manufacturers of the Nation’s leading prescription medications must expressly “agree” to sell selected products to Medicare beneficiaries at a below -market “maximum fair price.” If a manufacturer declines to do so, it incurs an “enterprise -crippling” daily tax on all sales of the product that tops out at 1,900% of its total daily revenue. App.49a (Hardiman, J., dissenting). For petitioner Bristol Myers Squibb Company and its selected product Eliquis, that would mean up to $1 billion in daily liability. Other than “agreeing” to sell its product at a government -dictated below -market price, the only way for a manufacturer to avoid this massive penalty is to withdraw every one of its medicines from both Medicare and Medicaid—about half the American market. A divided Third Circuit upheld the Program, reasoning that participation in it is wholly “voluntary” because a manufacturer can “choose” to avoid the IRA’s crippling taxes by withdrawing entirely from Medicare and Medicaid—thereby destroying its domestic b usiness. The questions presented are: 1. Whether the Program violates the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause by forcing manufacturers to sell medicines to Medicare beneficiaries at below -market prices. 2. Whether the Program violates the First Amendment by compelling manufacturers to expressly “agree” with the government’s narrative that its dic-tated amount is the medicine’s “maximum fair price,” set through a voluntary negotiation.