SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
frank pallone
As Supreme Court Case Looms, 164 US Lawmakers Defend Trans Youth
"Decisions about healthcare belong to patients, their doctors, and their families—not politicians," said Rep. Mark Pocan.
Sep 03, 2024
As LGBTQ+ rights advocates prepare for oral arguments in a U.S. Supreme Court case about bans on gender-affirming healthcare for trans youth, 164 members of Congress on Tuesday urged the justices to strike down Tennessee's 2023 law.
Tennessee is one of over two dozen states that has recently banned some or all of such care for trans minors, according to the Movement Advancement Project. In response to challenges from advocacy groups and the Biden administration, the right-wing high court agreed to take the case in June.
Arguments in United States v. Skrmetti are expected in the fall. The justices will decide whether Tennessee Senate Bill 1—which bans surgery, puberty blockers, and hormone treatment for trans youth—violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Congressional Democrats' new "friend of the court" brief argues that the court "should be highly skeptical of legislation banning safe and effective therapies that comport with the standard of care," and "should carefully examine the deeply troubling role that animosity towards transgender people has played in state legislation."
"The law at issue in this case is motivated by an animus towards the trans community and is part of a cruel, coordinated attack on trans rights by anti-equality extremists."
The amicus brief is led by House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), Congressional Equality Caucus Chair Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), Rep. Frank Pallone Jr. (D-N.J.), Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), and Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Subcommittee on Primary Health and Retirement Chair Ed Markey (D-Mass.).
"For years, far-right Republicans have been leading constant, relentless, and escalating attacks on transgender Americans," Markey said in a statement. "Their age-old, discriminatory playbook now threatens access to lifesaving, gender-affirming care for more than 100,000 transgender and nonbinary children living in states with these bans if the Supreme Court upholds laws like Tennessee's at the heart of Skrmetti that are fueled by ignorance and hate."
"It takes a special type of cruelty to target children for who they are," he continued. "I am proud to stand with my colleagues against dangerous, transphobic attacks and to reaffirm that our nation's commitment should be to equality and justice for all."
Pocan emphasized that "decisions about healthcare belong to patients, their doctors, and their families—not politicians."
"The law at issue in this case is motivated by an animus towards the trans community and is part of a cruel, coordinated attack on trans rights by anti-equality extremists," he added. "We strongly urge the Supreme Court to uphold the Constitution's promise of equal protection under the law and strike down Tennessee's harmful ban."
The brief is co-signed by another 150 Democrats in the House of Representatives, eight other Democratic senators, and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who caucuses with the party. It is also supported by the ACLU and the Human Rights Campaign (HRC).
"Thank you to the many members of Congress for standing with transgender and nonbinary youth across our country in asking the Supreme Court to find bans on lifesaving gender-affirming care to be unconstitutional," said HRC vice president of government affairs David Stacy.
"The government should not be able to interfere in decisions that are best made between families and doctors, particularly when that care is necessary and best practice," Stacy stressed. "These bans are dangerous, animated purely by anti-transgender bias, and have forced families to make heartbreaking decisions to support their children."
Keep ReadingShow Less
House Dems Say FDA 'Inappropriately Collaborated' With Biogen on New Alzheimer's Drug
"I am hopeful these findings are a wake-up call for FDA to reform its practices and a call to action to my congressional colleagues to continue oversight of the pharmaceutical industry to ensure they don't put profits over patients," said Rep. Carolyn Maloney.
Dec 29, 2022
Nearly two years after a leading U.S. consumer advocacy group sounded the alarm on the matter, House Democrats released a report Thursday showing the Food and Drug Administration and pharma giant Biogen "inappropriately collaborated" prior to the controversial approval of a new $28,000-per-year Alzheimer's drug of questionable efficacy.
Originally carrying a $56,000 annual price tag for uninsured patients—which Biogen's then-CEO called "fair"—aducanumab, sold under the brand name Aduhelm, was approved by the FDA in June 2021. The approval came despite concerns that the drug—a monoclonal antibody treatment for patients with mild cognitive impairment caused by Alzheimer's—might not work, as well as safety trial data showing that a staggering 4 in 10 participants suffered potentially fatal brain bleeding and swelling after taking it.
"This report documents the atypical FDA review process and corporate greed that preceded FDA's controversial decision to grant accelerated approval to Aduhelm."
The new report, the result of an 18-month probe by the Democrat-led House Oversight and Reform Committee and the Energy and Commerce Committee, found that the FDA's approval process for Aduhelm was "rife with irregularities," including an "atypical" number of meetings and other contacts between the agency and the Cambridge, Massachusetts-based drugmaker.
The panel also found that Biogen and the FDA closely collaborated on a document written for outside advisers during the approval process, with at least one paragraph of the company's submission authored by agency officials.
On pricing, the lawmakers concluded that Biogen gave Aduhelm an astronomical price tag knowing that doing so would place the drug out of reach for many patients—even those with insurance—and would cost Medicare $12 billion per year.
"This report documents the atypical FDA review process and corporate greed that preceded FDA's controversial decision to grant accelerated approval to Aduhelm," outgoing House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) said in a
statement.
\u201cNEW: Chairman @FrankPallone and House Oversight Chair @RepMaloney release report on the controversial review, approval, and pricing of Biogen\u2019s Alzheimer\u2019s drug Aduhelm. \n\nThe full report here \ud83d\udc47 https://t.co/0GxsdKIWZ4\u201d— Energy and Commerce Committee (@Energy and Commerce Committee) 1672338215
"While we all support the search for new cures and treatments to address devastating diseases like Alzheimer's, we must ensure that expediency does not take precedence over protocols that ensure the independence and scientific rigor of FDA," Pallone added. "Patient safety and drug efficacy must remain at the core of our nation's pharmaceutical regulatory review process."
House Oversight and Reform Committee Chair Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.), who will leave office when Republicans take over the lower chamber next week, said that "the number of patients and families impacted by Alzheimer's disease will continue to increase, and it is crucial that FDA and drug companies adhere to established procedures and conduct themselves with the transparency necessary to earn public trust."
"I am hopeful these findings are a wake-up call for FDA to reform its practices and a call to action to my congressional colleagues to continue oversight of the pharmaceutical industry to ensure they don't put profits over patients," she added.
The new report comes nearly two years after the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen warned of exactly the sort of questionable collaboration detailed in the publication.
"After aducanumab's two identical phase three trials were stopped in 2019 at the halfway point because a preliminary analysis found that they were unlikely to show the drug benefited Alzheimer's patients, the FDA and Biogen worked collaboratively to salvage the drug," the group wrote in January 2021. "They jointly relied on dubious analyses that over-emphasized the results of one phase three trial suggesting the drug may work at a high dose but disregarded data from the other phase three trial showing no benefit of the drug at any dose. The FDA and Biogen co-authored an unprecedented joint briefing document on aducanumab that was heavily biased in favor of the drug."
Reacting to the new report, Dr. Aaron Kesselheim—a former member of the FDA's outside advisory panel who voted against green-lighting Aduhelm and resigned after it was approved—toldThe Wall Street Journal Thursday that "I hope this inspires a full re-examination of the nature of the communications between FDA and industry."
"Lines of communication need to be at arm's length and transparent," he added, "so that there remains trust in the FDA's decisions."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular