Can a state regulate the US mail or ...

[PucksFool]

… interstate commerce?

https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2022-05-05/medication…
Medication abortion, in which a woman takes two drugs to terminate an early pregnancy at home, became the most commonly used method in the U.S. during the pandemic, particularly after the FDA stopped requiring the prescription be dispensed at a healthcare facility rather than delivered directly to a user. International online pharmacies ship them without a prescription at all.

https://www.newschannel5.com/news/gov-lee-signs-law-criminal…
Gov. Bill Lee signed legislation Thursday that would criminalize a person for obtaining abortion pills via a mail delivery service.

I think cannabis vendors can’t use the USPS or ship to every state because it is still criminalized at the federal level, but pregnancy ending drugs are not illegal. This looks to be an upcoming battle that will work its way through the courts.

[albaby1]

I suspect this is probably legal.

States have a lot of power to regulate how you buy a thing. To use an obvious example, a state has the power to prohibit you from buying a gun in any way other than in person. There’s a lot of public policy reasons why they might want to do that: ability to do a background check, making sure guns aren’t left on doorsteps in mailboxes for other parties to find, etc. You can’t DoorDash a gun, you can’t buy a gun through the mail. Most states have laws that prohibit using mail or delivery services except where the recipient is itself a licensed dealer, not an end user.

I don’t believe a court would construe that as regulating the U.S. Mail or interstate commerce. If a state wanted to impose a requirement that abortion medication could only be obtained in person, that’s probably going to hold up in court, absent some federal provision that could be argued to pre-empt it.

Albaby

[Hawkwin]

States can certainly legislate intrastate commerce and once the drugs enter (or attempt to enter) the state, interstate takes a back seat.

When people get caught bringing pot to Indiana from Michigan, they are arrested on state laws, not federal laws.

Same can be said for transporting guns across state lines - once you are in a new state, you must comply with their rules on transportation and ownership.

[jerryab2]

Mailed from overseas–no US law violated. That state law may be unconstitutional because it violates the First Amendment.

Women can go to another state (or Mexico?), get the pills, and return.

[Neuromancer]

How do they know what’s in your mail?

[albaby1]

How do they know what’s in your mail?

They almost certainly don’t.

I expect that the intent behind these laws probably isn’t about racking up lots of successful criminal prosecutions of individuals ordering these pills. It’s about keeping the bigger pharmaceutical companies and telehealth providers from shipping them.

Not that the law specifically puts those providers in any danger of actual criminal prosecution in Oklahoma. More likely, those providers may run afoul of requirements of either their home jurisdiction or their insurance providers. I expect that for many of them, their local regulations and insurance requirements will contain provisions that prohibit them from sending a medication in violation of law. Now, some liberal states are making proactive changes to their laws to make them ‘safe haven’ sources of abortion services, which might allay some of those concerns. Still, it’s not an easy position for a company to be in if they’re engaged in business which involves their customer committing a crime. They’re going to be in a sticky situation indeed if there’s a medical complication that results in a negligence suit against them, when they knew that it was unlawful - criminal - for their customer to receive the drugs they were sending.

Albaby

[Hawkwin]

How do they know what’s in your mail?

If you are Pfizer, it is REALLY not in your interest to try and hide shipments of a drug that is illegal to possess under state law. There is a CHILLING effect that simply makes it not worth the risk, however small. There as so many things a state could do to your business that makes it very unappetizing for all the rest of your business.

Take a look at what Florida did to Disney just for voicing opposition. Imagine what Florida would do to a company that was trying to ship in illegal drugs to their residents.

[ptheland]

If you are Pfizer, it is REALLY not in your interest to try and hide shipments of a drug that is illegal to possess under state law.

The drug companies wouldn’t be shipping to individuals. They’ll most likely respect their distribution chain. It’s pharmacies that would be shipping the drugs.

Granted, that doesn’t change the bulk of the problem, it’s just that it’s pharmacies with the problem and not Pfizer and other drug companies.

Now, how about those Canadian pharmacies? They could be the big winners here. Outside of the purview of individual states, and the drugs aren’t illegal at the federal level as long as there is a prescription.

–Peter

[warrl]

Hm…

Gov. Bill Lee signed legislation Thursday that would criminalize a person for obtaining abortion pills via a mail delivery service.

…

International online pharmacies ship them without a prescription at all.

…

Someone want to place an order for some, to be delivered to Gov. Lee?

[warrl]

States can certainly legislate intrastate commerce and once the drugs enter (or attempt to enter) the state, interstate takes a back seat.

Not necessarily. There’s precedent that says that if you grow something on your own property for your own use (so it never enters commerce at all, let alone interstate commerce) that is also traded in interstate commerce, the effect of your crop on interstate commerce - i.e. that you are buying less of it from elsewhere that might be another state - makes your crop subject to federal regulation.

[laffisloon]

Some people in the US get medicine from other countries because of the lower prices. This is illegal, but not enforced. State authorities have no effective way to stop this.

A pharmacist can mail prescription medicine to a patient in another state. But location of the patient controls what is needed to get a prescription. There is an undecided Mississippi court case (Genbiopro v. Dobbs) arguing the FDA’s decisions have supremacy over state laws. (The Supreme Court, if forced to hear the appeal, might rule that Congress does not have the power to regulate medicine.)

— links —
Genbiopro, Inc. v. Dobbs (3:20-cv-00652)
District Court, S.D. Mississippi
Date Filed: Oct. 9, 2020
Date of Last Known Filing: Sept. 14, 2021
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/18525833/genbiopro-inc-…

US judge blocks Mass. ban on painkiller, April 15, 2014
“If the Commonwealth were able to countermand the FDA’s determinations and substitute its own requirements, it would undermine the FDA’s ability to make drugs available to promote and protect the public health,” Zobel said in her ruling, saying the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution gives the federal regulatory agency more weight than the state."
https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/04/15/federal-judge-s…

“It is illegal for a medical professional to prescribe the pills via a telemedicine appointment to a woman in a state where they are illegal, legal experts say. “The laws around telemedicine generally say that the location of the patient controls,”… Women in states cracking down on telemedicine abortion have increasingly turned to ordering pills online from overseas. While the practice is not legal, state authorities have said they have no effective way of policing orders from foreign doctors and pharmacies.”
https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/…

Buying Prescription Drugs From Canada: Legal or Illegal?, May 31st, 2013
“But is it legal to buy medications from Canadian pharmacies? The answer is, technically no, but U.S. officials are allowing it to happen.”
https://www.elderlawanswers.com/buying-prescription-drugs-fr…

from https://www.usps.com/ship/shipping-restrictions.htm
Domestically Prohibited Items
You can’t send these items in the U.S. mail:
Air Bags
Ammunition
Explosives
Gasoline
Marijuana (medical or otherwise); hemp/CBD is allowed, but restricted

Domestically Restricted Items
“Only licensed manufacturers and dealers may mail or receive handguns. Even though unloaded rifles and shotguns are mailable, mailers must comply with applicable regulations.”
“Prescription medications may only be mailed by Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) registered distributors.”
“For prescription medicines containing a nonnarcotic drug(s), only a pharmacist or medical practitioner, etc., who dispenses the medicine may mail such substances to the patients under their care… each mailpiece containing a mailable drug or medicine (that does not contain a controlled substance) must be held in a plain outer wrapper or packaging.”

[Hawkwin]

It’s pharmacies that would be shipping the drugs.

Pharmacies would simply NOT STOCK a prohibited substance. That is a non-starter. They would have to be shipped directly to the consumer.

[flyerboys]

If legal issues regarding this arise i am convinced that formidable ferocious resistance and underground networks would arise. The “War on Drugs” was of immense benefit to drug dealers…

Lordy lordy, why do people keep imagining they can control via mere governmental power.

david fb

[Leap1]

Lordy lordy, why do people keep imagining they can control via mere governmental power.

Moral authority.

You are on the list for changes.

But then again we all are.

All in the name of giving the wealthy a tax break.

[Goofyhoofy]

Pharmacies would simply NOT STOCK a prohibited substance. That is a non-starter. They would have to be shipped directly to the consumer.

Right. And that’s why there are no pharmacies implicated in the distribution of tens of billions of oxycodone pills across the country.

And I’m the Queen of Hearts here in Wonderland.

[jaagu]

If legal issues regarding this arise i am convinced that formidable ferocious resistance and underground networks would arise. The “War on Drugs” was of immense benefit to drug dealers…

==========================================================

And “Prohibition” was of immense benefit to speakeasys, bootleggers, and alcohol makers/dealers…

Jaak

[steve203]

Lordy lordy, why do people keep imagining they can control via mere governmental power.

As offered several times over the years, the USian puritanical, punishment oriented, culture.

Steve

[Hawkwin]

Right. And that’s why there are no pharmacies implicated in the distribution of tens of billions of oxycodone pills across the country.

Sloppy Red Hearing.

Oxy is legal. If a state made it illegal to prescribe Oxy, it would vanish from pharmacies.

[Goofyhoofy]

Sloppy Red Hearing.
Oxy is legal. If a state made it illegal to prescribe Oxy, it would vanish from pharmacies.

Quite clearly producing almost 100 billion pills for a country of 300 million people was not “legal.” That has been demonstrated by billion dollar fines against corporations and individuals, and jail terms levied against people who abused and misused the law for their own benefit.

Government may have been able to railroad brick and mortar establishments out of business with a variety of stratagems on “hallway width” and “waiting period” and “zoning requirements” and so forth, but it is highly unlikely they will be able to stop the intrusion of drugs, both legally prescribed and not, through the mails or other means. I mean we’re talking about 5 small pills which can be sent in an envelope, for cripes sake. Something like 60% of abortions are done via this method now, and there are Facebook groups, rights groups, and others already organizing to make products available from domestic states where it remains legal and from foreign countries where regulation is slight.

Certainly some will be stopped, but I suspect those numbers will be at the margins, and the effort to stamp this out will fail, just as the war on drugs has failed and just as prohibition failed. The internet - and big pharma - really have changed everything.

[Hawkwin]

Quite clearly producing almost 100 billion pills for a country of 300 million people was not “legal.” That has been demonstrated by billion dollar fines against corporations and individuals, and jail terms levied against people who abused and misused the law for their own benefit.

Goofy, you are more intelligent that this.

Oxy is a legal product. How a doctor prescribes it may not be.

If Oxy was made illegal, pharmacies would simply stop carrying it. Does any pharmacy sell crack cocaine? Of course not.

Have you ever heard of Schedule V cough syrup? It is a legal, over-the-counter product that contains codeine. Many states have passed laws that now require to be kept behind the counter. That does not mean it is no longer abused. It does mean that no pharmacy in those states is going to break the law by selling in front of the counter. If a state made Schedule V cough syrup illegal, it would simply vanish from the pharmacy entirely.